
llm V5^t) 



liiink .L^-l 



i'i<k.si;nti:ij hy 



MIRABEAU BUONAPARTE LAMAR 



BY 

ASA KYRUS CHRISTIAN 



UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA 




MIRABEAU BUONAPARTE LAMAR 



BY 

ASA KYRUS CHRISTIAN 



A THESIS 

PRESENTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL IN 

PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR 

THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY 



AUSTIN, TEXAS 

Von Boeckmann-Jones Co.. Printers 

1922 






KAR 20 1922 



TO MY WIFE, 

WHOSE CONSTANT ENCOURAGEMENT 

HAS MADE POSSIBLE THIS 

WORK 



PREFACE 

This life of Mirabeau B. Lamar was begun while the writer was 
a graduate student in the University of Texas, and at the sug- 
gestion of Professor Eugene C. Barker, Professor of American 
History. It was continued and completed at the University of 
Pennsylvania, where it was accepted as part of the requirements 
for the degree of doctor of philosophy. 

The excuse for such a study need hardly be expressed. The his- 
tory of Texas and the Southwest is just now beginning to be writ- 
ten as a result of special investigation in different fields of South- 
western history. And with all the monographs, mostly dealing 
with pre-revolutionary days, very few have been devoted to a study 
of the few years when Texas was an independent republic. Stephen 
F. Austin is known for his sterling character and his masterly 
work as a colonizer and transplanter of American civilization ; Sam 
Houston is known for his spectacular military achievements; and 
that is about as far as the general knowledge extends with regard 
to the "Critical Period" in Texas history. Many people in the 
East have no realization of the fact that Texas was one time an 
independent republic. And the ignorance with regard to Texas 
even among Texans is enough to justify one more liistorical study 
with a view to eliminating that ignorance. 

It seems that Lamar has been allowed to suffer more than others 
by the general tendency of people to forget their notables. Colonel 
of Cavalry at San Jacinto, Secretary of War in the provisional 
cabinet immediately after San Jacinto, appointed by the president 
and cabinet as commander-in-chief of the army, elected vice-presi- 
dent in 1836, and president in 1838, Lamar was not less important 
in establishing Texan independence than other characters who have 
received more notice. 

It is not intended that this shall be a complete biography. The 
interest of the writer was more along the lines of the connection 
of Lamar with public affairs until the close of his administration 
as president in 1841, though for sake of clearness and complete- 
ness, the early life and the life of the subject of the paper is 
sketched briefly. 

In the preparation of a paper of this nature, there are many 



sources and many individuals to whom one is indebted. Tlie chief 
obligation of this writer is to Professor E. C. Barker, at whose 
suggestion the paper was undertaken, and to whose scholarly 
example it owes whatever historical merit it may possess. He 
not only advised with the writer, but read the whole in manu- 
script, and superintended the publication of the paper in the 
Southwestern Historical Quarterly during a protracted illness of 
the writer. An acknowledgment of indebtedness is also made to 
Mrs. Mattie Austin Hatcher, archivist in the history department 
of the University of Texas, for her aid and counsel in the use of 
material and for reading of the proof. Mr. E. W. Winkler, ref- 
erence librarian in the University of Texas, was also helpful in 
his suggestions, and his wide knowledge of the literature of the 
field. Miss Elizabeth West, at present State Librarian, prepared 
the excellent calendar of Lamar's papers, w^hich the writer found 
so helpful. The citations to the Lamar Papers are made in the 
serial numbers of Miss West's calendar. 

Professors Herman V. Ames, John Bach McMaster, and Albert E. 
McKinley kindly read the entire manuscript and made valuable 
suggestions as to plan, and saved the writer from possible errors. 
Many others I have been indebted to for specific details, and I have 
tried to indicate that indebtedness in the footnotes. 

Lastly, I am under particular obligations to my wife for assist- 
ing me in the original writing of the paper, in criticism of form 
and structure, and for constant aid in preparing it for the printer. 



CONTENTS 

Chapter 1. Early Years in Georgia. 

Chapter II. As a Texas Revolutionist, 1836-1838. 

Chapter III. Presidential Administration : Domestic Affairs. 

1. Education. 

2. Finances. 

3. Army and Navy. 

4. Location of Permanent Seat of Government. 

Chapter IV. Frontier Defense. 

1. Relations with Miscellaneous Indian Tribes. 

2. Relations with the Cherokees. 

Chapter V. The Santa Fe Expedition. 

Chapter VI. Foreign Affairs. 

1. Efforts to Negotiate Peace with Mexico. 

2. The Federalists and the Alliance with 

Yucatan. 

3. Relations with the United States. 

4. Relations with Prance and England. 

Chapter VII. Closing Years. 



MIRABEAU BUONAPAETE LAMAR 

A. K. CHRISTIAN 

Chapter I 

EARLY LIFE IN GEORGIA 

When Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar arrived in Texas just be- 
fore the battle of San Jacinto to cast in his fortunes with the new 
republic, he had already achieved some prominence in his native 
State of Georgia. He was born at Louisville, Warren County, 
in that State, on August IG, 1798, the second of a family of nine. 
The family from which he was descended, tradition says, being 
Huguenots, left France during the persecution of Protestants 
under Richelieu and settled in Maryland. On November 17, 
1663, Lord Baltimore granted certificates of nationality to Thomas 
and Peter Lamore, and ten years later to Jolin Lamore. Peter 
Lamar left a will dated in 1693. Thomas Lamar also left a will, 
dated October 4, 1713, leaving to his wife and two sons, Thomas 
and John, considerable estates in Prince George's County. The 
second Thomas also left a will, dated May 11, 1747, in which he 
distributed a large estate among his six sons and two sons-in-law. 
In 1755 three of these sons, Robert, Thomas, and John, and one 
of the sons-in-law, sold their estates and moved down into South 
Carolina and Georgia. The father of the subject of this paper 
was John Lamar, grandson of the John Lamar who settled in 
Georgia in 1755. He was bom in 1769, and married his first 
cousin, Rebecca Lamar.^ 

To John and Rebecca Lamar were bom four sons and five daugh- 
ters. With the family lived Zachariah Lamar, a brother to John, 
an eccentric, self-taught man, who is supposed to have given to 
the sons their names. He afterwards married and his daughter 
became the wife of Howell Cobb, prominent in Georgia history. 
The eldest son, Lucius Quintus Cincinnatus, became a member of 
the Superior Court of Georgia in 1830, at the age of thirty-three. 
He was the father of L. Q. C. Lamar, who was a prominent South- 
ern statesman before and after the Civil War, becoming Secretary 
of the Interior in Pro^:ident Cleveland's Cabinet, and later an Asso- 

^Edward Mayes, Lucius Q. C. Lamar, 13, 14. 



2 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 

date Justice of the United States Supreme Court. Other sons 
were Jefferson Jackson and Thomas Eandolph." 

It is probable that Mirabeau availed himself of the opportuni- 
ties offered by the schools in his locality, though he never went 
to college. "Though not a rich man," wrote Joel Crawford, a 
contemporary, and the law partner of L. Q. C, the elder, "Mr. 
John Lamar, by dint of industry and good management, found 
means to give his children the best education which the schools of 
the country afforded. None of them had the benefit of a college 
course, nor were they (it is believed) acquainted with the ancient 
classics or any other language but English."^ A close application 
to the rules of good English is indicated in all his writings, though 
how much of this was due to training in school it is impossible 
to say. It seems, however, that he was chiefly self-taught, as in 
all his writings there is evident a lack of system which is likely to 
come with self-education. That he acquired a great mass of in- 
formation is certain, and his native ability in expression caused 
him to be rated by his contemporaries much above his merit. 

In 1819, at the age of twenty-one, he established a general mer- 
chandise business in Cahawba, Alabama. Being unsuccessful in 
this business, we find him in March, 1821, announcing his pur- 
pose to publish a humorous paper, "Village Miscellany to be writ- 
ten in a series of niimbers by Lanthornbalvon,"* On January 1, 
1822, he had printed a broadside in verse entitled, "New Year's 
Address to the Patrons of the Cahawba Press." When he became 
editor of this paper, if he did, does not appear. A few days later 
he sent a copy of this address to his brother in Georgia. In a 
note on the back of the broadside he wrote: 

Dear Brother 

I am here in Cahaba, without any business, or likelihood to 
obtain any, shortly — You need not be disappointed if you see me 
back in Geo. again in few weeks ; in great haste 
Yours &C. 

M. B. Lamar.'' 

x\t the same time he explained tliat he had Avritten the address 

'Ibid., 218. 

^Bench and liar of Georgia. Quoted by Edward Mayes, Lucius Q. C. 
Lamar, 16. 

*MSS., Lamar Papers, No. 34. 
^Lamar Papers, No. 44. 



Early Life in Georgia 3 

"with a running quill," and apologized for the errors. It seems 
probable that the verses were contributed by Lamar to the Ca- 
hawba Press, and that he had no official connection with the paper. 

In 1823 George M. Troup became Governor of Georgia after a 
four years campaign, and Lamar acted as his private secretary 
during the stirring times of his administration. He was recom- 
mended for the appointment by Joel Crawford, law partner of 
his elder brother, as a "gentleman not more distinguished by the 
loftiest sentiments of honor, than by mental Superiority & devo- 
tion to republican politics.® It was during this period that the 
struggle between Georgia and the Federal Government over the 
removal of the Creek and Cherokee Indians took place, and Lamar 
is credited with activity in raising the militia to resist the efforts 
of the Federal Government to coerce Georgia.^ It was probably 
at this time that he conceived an enmity towards the Indians that 
went with him throughout his life. It was during this period, 
also, that he adopted the principles advocated by the extreme 
States' Eights party. 

On January 1, 1826, his term as secretary to the governor hav- 
ing expired, he married Miss Tabitha B. Jordan, of Perry, Ala- 
bama, and for the next two years lived in retirement on the farm. 
On January 1, 1828, he announced his purpose to publish a news- 
paper in the town of Columbus, "if sufficient patronage can be 
obtained to warrant the undertaking." The Columbus Enquirer, 
he announced in the prospectus, was to be attached to "the Ee- 
publican creed as exemplified in the administration of Thomas 
Jefferson; and in State politics, adhering to the principles that 
characterized the late able administration of Governor Troup, it 
will defend 'the Union of the States and the sovereignty of the 
States.' " Its influence in the ensuing presidential election was 
to be given to the democratic candidate most formidable to the 
men in office. "But it will not be wholly devoted to these mat- 
ters," he stated. "A large portion of its columns will be filled 
with such miscellaneous selections as are calculated to please and 
to instruct; — to gratify fancy and to increase knowledge — making 
it a literary as well as a political paper." It was to be printed 

'Lamar Papers, No. 50. 

'Henry S. Foote, Texas and the Texans, II, 285. 



4 Miraheau Buonaparte Lamar 

on a large sheet, with new type, once a week, at three dollars a 
year.^ 

He continued the publication of this paper alone until 1833. 
During that time he wrote editorials on the questions of the day. 
A number of them were in defence of the Troup administration. 
Others defended the Federal Government for the removal of the 
Indians west of the Mississippi, defended the doctrine of state 
rights, and discussed in a learned and heavy way various consti- 
tutional questions. There are also book reviews written by him. 
At the same time he was getting practice in public speaking by 
delivering addresses to various boys' and girls' schools.'* 

In the summer of 1833 Lamar became a candidate for Congress. 
It was the custom for the legislative caucus to nominate the candi- 
dates for Congress. The caucus met at Milledgeville and nom- 
inated the nine candidates, passing over Lamar, and appointed a 
committee of seven to fill any vacancies which might occur. 
There was a vacancy, but the committee of seven refused to en- 
dorse the candidacy of Lamar, and nominated another, making 
ten candidates for the nine seats. Under these conditions Lamar 
was defeated. During the campaign he came out in an address 
denouncing the caucus system, and stating that he would submit 
his candidacy to no seven men. He complained that the Troup 
party was not represented, and that there was hence inequality. 
"If my political bark cannot sail upon the sea of correct prin- 
ciples," he wrote in his bombastic style, 

let it founder, — it shall never float upon the waves of triumphant 
error. ... If my political course has been equivocal or 
treacherous — warm when honors were to be distributed, but cool 
if not bestowed on me — if I have either in public or private life 
been more cunning than candid, more selfish than serviceable, or 
more ilHberal than just — if I have made Patriotism subordinate 
to a love of promotion; demanding much, but performing little, 
fattening upon offices, yet with cormorant appetite still asking for 
more, and threatening desertion if more is not given — in a word, 
if I have been one of those hollow-hearted politicians, who hold 
with the hare and run with hound, . . . 

then, he did not deserve the office that he aspired to.^'' 

"Lamar Papers, No. 73. 

'Lamar Papers, Nos. 69, 78. 79, 84, 85, 88, 89, 90, 102, 104. 

"Broadside, Lamar Papers, No. 168. 



Early Life in Georgia 5 

After his defeat for Congress in 1833, Lamar became active in 
the organization and propagation of the States' Eights Party of 
Georgia. On November 13, 1833, a States' Eights meeting was held 
at Milledgeville and adopted a preamble and resolutions. It de- 
nounced Jackson's proclamation in connection with nullification 
in South Carolina; adopted "the Virginia and Kentucky Eesolu- 
tions as triumphant in 1825, 6, 7," and denounced the Force Bill 
as a glaring infraction of States' rights. A few days later a pros- 
pectus announced a new series of the Columbus Enquirer to be 
edited by Mirabeau B. Lamar and William B. Tinsley in support 
of the principles of the States' Eights Party." About the same 
time Lamar delivered an address upon the doctrines of the States' 
Eights and Union parties in Georgia. He stated that the union 
was a union of sovereign and independent States bound together 
by a written compact, and the general government was the agent 
of the States. He defended the right of nullifying an act of 
Congress as the agent has no power under the Constitution to 
coerce a State. "But if the agent, feeling might and forgetting 
right, shall attempt to enforce her mandates by military coercion, 
then the State thus menaced must determine for herself whether 
she will submit to the objectionable acts — meet force with force — 
or retire peacefully from the Union. Such I believe to be funda- 
mentally the doctrine of the Party with which I have the honor 
to act."^- 

He continued his connection with this paper until some time in 
1834. The death of his wife in 1833, together with an impair- 
ment of his own health, and a naturally restless disposition, led 
him to sever his connection with the paper in 1834, temporarily, 
if not permanently. In January, 1835, we find him in Alabama 
on his way to Texas,^^ He arrived at Nacogdoches in July, and 
immediately proceeded to Coles's settlement, where he made known 
his intention to become a citizen of Texas. He paid Captain 
Horatio Chriesman a fee to run off a headright of land. He 
also announced in a public address, at Washington his intention 
to become a citizen of Texas, and said that he desired in the event 
"of a revolutionarv^ struggle, to made her destiny mine for good 

^^Lamar Papers, No. 178. 
"Lamar Papers, No. 177. 
"Lamar Papers, No. 194. 



6 Miraheau Buonaparte Lamar 

or ill.'' It seems that these declarations were the result of a more 
or less sudden impulse. A biographical sketch, published in the 
Nacogdoches Chronicle in 1838 states that he came to Texas to 
collect material for a history of Texas.^* This seems a likely- 
reason for his trip as is indicated by the nature of his literary col- 
lections during that period. 

From Washington he went to San Felipe, but he found the 
land office closed on account of threatened hostilities, and was 
unable to get a certificate for his headright. He was told by 
Stephen F. Austin that he could return to the United States to 
settle up his business there before emigrating, and sailed for 
Georgia in November, 1835. He arrived in Georgia late in the year, 
but almost immediately learned that there was danger of a serious 
war in Texas, and returned to Texas before he could attend to his 
affairs in Georgia,^'' arriving at Velasco in the latter part of 
March. During his brief stay in Georgia he had succeeded in 
interesting several men there in land speculation, and he brought 
back with him $6,000 to invest for them in Texas land.^*' 

^*Telegraph and Texas Register, April 14, 1838; June 23, 1838. 

^^Telegraph and Texas Register, June, 23, 1838. 

"M. B. Lamar to J. J. Lamar, April 10, 1838; Lamar Papers, 351. 



As a Texas Revolutionist, 1S36-1S38 7 

Chapter II 

AS A TEXAS EEVOLUTIONIST, 1836-1838 

When Lamar arrived in Texas in the latter part of March, 1836, 
the affairs of the Texas Eevolutionists seemed well nigh hopeless. 
After a period of successes during November and December, 1835, 
their fortunes had undergone a change. In January-, 1836, Santa 
Anna had begun the invasion of Texas with a force of six thou- 
sand men. On March 6, the Alamo fell, while the convention at 
Washington on the Brazos was declaring Texas independent, and 
framing a provisional government. The Goliad massacre had 
taken place on March 27, and the Texan army under General Hous- 
ton had begun a retreat from Gonzales which took them to the 
San Jacinto battlefield. And not only the army, but the whole 
populace was in a panicky flight. The civil government under 
David G. Burnet had first fled from Washington to Harrisburg, 
and thence to Galveston Island. It was under these circum- 
stances that Lamar joined the army just before the battle of San. 
Jacinto. 

On March 25, 1836, Alexander E. Patton of Velasco wrote to 
a man named Kilgore at Brazoria, asking that his horse, which 
Kilgore had been keeping, be turned over to "Mr. M. B. Lamar 
. . . just arrived on the Schooner Flash . . . anxious to 
visit the army."" Whether the horse was turned over to Lamar 
does not appear. One biographer states that Lamar walked from 
Velasco to Harrisburg in order to get there in time for the ex- 
pected battie.^^ On April 10, he wrote his brother at Macon, 
Georgia, stating that he was expecting to go into battle, and giving 
directions as to the disposal of his effects in case of his death. 
"I shall reach Houston day after tomorrow, a distance from this 
place about 50 miles," he wrote. 

In the event of my falling in Battle, you will find my trunks, 
papers, etc., in the possession of Mv». Jane Long, who has tem- 
porarily fled from Brazoria to Boliver point at Galveston Bay. 
The money brought by me to be laid out in Lands, I have of course, 

"Patton to Kiltrore, March 25, 1836, in Lamar Papers, No. 348. 
"Thrall. Pictorial Ristory of Texas, 581. 



8 Mirahea.u Buonaparte Lamar 

in the present confused state of things, not been able to lay out. 
Govt, has no authority to sell lands, and from individuals no pur- 
chase can yet be made with safety. I have therefore been much 
embarrassed to know what to do with so large a sum of money; 
it is dangerous to keep it about me, especially as I am going into 
Battle. After due consideration, I have placed it in the hands of 
Lorenzo Zavala, the vice-President of the Government, the most 
responsible and probably the most honest among them. . . . 
My health at present is good. I feel much solicitude for my 
mother; If she was well and cheerful and could bear affliction with 
more fortitude, I should be happy — Tell Kebecca Ann that she 
must learn to write read and spell well, and that is the best 
education. . . .^^ 

Some time between the date of this letter and April 20 he 
joined the army on the Brazos, as a private. On April 20, in a 
preliminary skirmish at San Jacinto, he rescued a comrade at the 
risk of his own life, and for this gallant conduct he was elected 
to the command of the cavalry.^" On the following day he was 
in command of the cavalry, and was officially commended by the 
commander-in-chief, Sam Houston, and the Secretary of War, 
T. J. Eusk, who was present and took part in the battle. Houston 
in reporting the battle said : 

Our cavalry, sixty-one in number, commanded by Colonel Mira- 
beau B. Lamar, whose gallant and daring conduct on the previous 
day had attracted the admiration of his comrades and called him 
to that station, placed on our right, completed our line. Our 
cavalry was first dispatched to the front of the enemVs left, for 
the purpose of attracting their notice, whilst an extensive island 
of timber afforded us an opportunity of concentrating our forces 
and deploying from that point, agreeably to the previous design 
of the troops. Every evolution was performed with alacrity, the 
whole advancing rapidly in line and through an open prairie, 
without any protection whatever for our men.^' 

The same sentiments were expressed by Eusk in his report to 
the President.^^ 

As is well known, the battle of San Jacinto resulted in over- 

"M. B. Lamar to J. J. Lamar, April 10, 1836, Lamar Papers, No. 351. 

"Thrall, Pictorial History of Texas, 581; Texas Almanac, 1858. p. 110. 
Brown, History of Texas, II, 20. 

"Brown, History of Texas, 11, 20; Yoakum, History of Texas, II, 500. 
Lamar Papers, No. 355. 

"Brown, History of Texas, 27; Yoakum, History of Texas, II, f04; 
Lamar Papers, No. 354. 



.4s a Texas Revolutionist, 1S3G-18S8 9 

whelming victory for the Texans. Practically the whole Mexican 
army under Santa Anna was captured, including Santa Anna 
himself. On April 22, General Houston and Santa Anna entered 
into an armistice until a treaty of peace could be drawn up, and 
Santa Anna ordered his subsidiary forces to return io Bexar for 
further orders.-^ It was thought by General Houston, President 
Burnet, and a majority of the Cabinet, that an excellent oppor- 
tunity presented itself while Santa Anna was in their power to 
form a treaty guaranteeing the independence of Texas. Lamar, 
who had become Secretary of War on May 5, in place of Kusk, 
■who had assumed command of the army, and Potter, Secretary of 
the Navy, opposed any treaty with Santa Anna, and favored his 
execution for the crimes he had committed. 

In his letter to the President and Cabinet on May 12, Lamar 
said that a majority of the Cabinet considered Santa Anna a 
prisoner of war, but he considered him a murderer. "A chieftain 
battling for what he conceives to be the rights of his country,'* 
he continued, 

however mistaken in his views, may be privileged to make hot 
and vigorous war upon the foe ; but, when in violation of all prin- 
ciples of civilized conflict, he avows and acts upon the revolting 
policy of extermination and rapine, slaying the surrendering and 
plundering whom he slays, he forfeits the commisseration of man- 
kind by sinking the character of the hero into that of an abhorred 
murderer. 

Some would assent to the justice of the sentence of death, but 
were willing to waive its execution for certain advantages which 
might flow to the country from a wise and judicious action. He 
asked what surety had they that any stipulations would be car- 
ried out. 

What he assents to while a prisoner, he may reject when a free- 
man. Indeed, the idea of treating with a man in our power, who 
views freedom in acquiescence, and death in opposition, seems to 
me more worthy of ridicule than refutation. 

He said that it was doubtful if Santa Anna would liave the 
power to fulfill his engagements, even if he had the will to do so. 
He expected that as soon as the news of the defeat should reach 

"Yoakum, History of Texas, II, 150. 



10 Miraheau Buonaparte Lama/r 

Mexico, Santa Anna would lose all his authority, and would be 
powerless for good or ill. 

I am therefore decidedly opposed to all negotiation or arrange- 
ments with him ; — first, because he is a prisoner and not free to 
act; secondly, because he is faithless and therefore unworthy of 
confidence; and thirdly, because of the great certainty of his in- 
ability to fulfill his promises even with the desire to do so. 

He stated further that even if negotiations should be entered 
into and prove successful, he would regret the miscarriage of ven- 
geance and justice. Finally, if any negotiations were undertaken, 
he thought arrangements should be made for transferring the pris- 
oners in exchange for Texan prisoners in Mexico, holding Santa 
Anna till the end of the war.'* 

In spite of the opposition of Lamar, and the strong reasons 
given for retaining Santa Anna, the Cabinet entered into an agree- 
ment with him on May 14. By the public agreement, which was 
more in the nature of an armistice, Santa Anna agreed not to 
take up arms, nor use his influence to cause them to be taken up 
during the war for independence. He agreed on withdrawal from 
Texas, and an exchange of prisoners. The Texan authorities, on 
their part, agreed to send Santa Anna to Vera Cruz as soon as it 
should be judged proper. By the secret agreement entered into 
the same day, besides the points mentioned in the public agree- 
ment, he agreed to prepare the cabinet of Mexico to receive the 
mission which the government of Texas might send, so that "hj 
negotiations all differences may be settled, and the independence 
that has been declared by the convention may be acknowledged." 
He agreed, further, that a treaty of commerce, amity, and limits 
between Mexico and Texas, should be established, the territory of 
Texas not to extend beyond the Eio Bravo del Norte. Texas 
agreed that "the present return of General Santa Anna to Vera 
Cruz being indispensable for the purpose of effecting his solemn 
engagements, the government of Texas will provide for his im- 
mediate embarkation for said port."-'' 

The Government was on the point of sending Santa Anna to 
Vera Cruz in accordance with this agreement, when, on June 3, 

"Lamar Papers, No. 361 ; Brown, History of Texas, II, 56-60. 
="*Yoakum, History of Texas, II, 526-528; Brown, History of Texas, II, 
62-64; Lamar Papers, Nos. 365, 366. 



As a Texas Revolutionist, 1S36-1838 11 

Thomas Jefferson Green arrived at Velasco with two hundred and 
thirty volunteers from New Orleans, and on account of their oppo- 
sition prevented his release. At that time, and after, Lamar sup- 
ported the civil against the military authorities, and joined with 
the President in resisting the demands of Green and his coad- 
jutors for the execution of the prisoner. 

General Houston had been severely wounded in the battle of San 
Jacinto, and found it necessary to go to New Orleans for treat- 
ment. Consequently, he surrendered the command of the army, 
May 5, 1836, to Brigadier-General Rusk, who had resigned as 
Secretary of War. The army under Rusk followed the retreating 
Mexicans as far as Goliad, where they collected and buried the 
bones of Fannin and his men, and then established headquarters 
at Victoria,-*' Here they were joined by volunteers from the 
United States, increasing the army to about twenty-three hundred 
by July 1.-" Among these volunteers were Green, who had pre- 
vented the sending of Santa Anna to Vera Cruz, Felix Huston, 
and others who felt themselves specially fitted to command the 
army. The army undoubtedly fell into a state of mutiny. Each 
of the leaders of volunteers was intriguing for the chief command. 
Some of the soldiers held that Sam Houston was still in command 
though absent, and refused to obey the orders of Rusk, It was 
under these circumstances that Rusk appealed to the President 
and Cabinet to appoint a commander-in-chief of the army. Act- 
ing on this request the President and Cabinet, on June 25, ap- 
pointed Lamar, who had resigned as Secretary of War a few days 
before, to be Major-General and Commander-in-Chief of the army. 

It was not until July 14 that Lamar arrived at the camp. In 
the meantime he had been at Brazoria making preparations for 
supplies for the army, and preparing to resist the invasion which 
seemed threatening. He had received numerous letters of con- 
gratulation, and was unprepared to learn when he reached Victoria 
on the 13th that there was considerable opposition to accepting 
him as comm.ander-in-chief. When he arrived at the headquarters 
of the army at Guadalupe the following day, he was met by a com- 
mittee which had been appointed previously, and requested not to 

"Yoakum, History of Texas, II, 177. 
^Ubid., II, 183. 



12 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 

assume authority as commander-in-chief until the subject could 
be more fully considered by the officers. 

Felix Huston, who had arrived in camp on July 4, according to 
his account, was one of the leaders in the refusal to receive Lamar, 
though he pretended to be acting only as an agent for the others.-^ 
At a meeting of the officers shortly after he arrived in camp, 
Huston said, all present were willing to acknowledge the merits 
of Lamar, but that they denied the power of the Cabinet to super- 
sede General Houston and they would not consent to the destruc- 
tion of General Rusk. He suggested the appointment of a com- 
mittee to meet General Lamar and acquaint him with the desires 
of the officers. The committee was appointed, and resolutions 
drawn up as follows : 

Resolved, That this meeting highly appreciate the gallantry and 
worth of General Lamar, and will be at all times ready to receive 
him with the cordiality and respect due to his personal and mili- 
tary acquirements. 

Resolved, That Colonel B. P. Smith and Colonel H. Millard 
be appointed a committee to wait on General Lamar, and tender 
him the respects of this meeting, and inform him that, there being 
some question of the propriety of his appointment by the Presi- 
dent as major-general of the Texan army, by which he is directed 
to assume the chief command of the army, he is requested by the 
officers present not to act in his official capacity of major-general 
until the subject may be more maturely considered by the meeting 
of the officers of the army.^^ 

Lamar, unwilling to accept the statement of the officers as to 
the resistance to his assumption of command, determined to ad- 
dress the army. In his speech he dwelt on his service in the 
battle of San Jacinto. Since then he had been on the point of 
returning to the United States when news came that the Mexicans 
were preparing to invade Texas again, and he immediately made 
his plans to join the army. He was not anxious to lead the army 
if they did not want him, but would cheerfully take his place in 
the ranks. After he had spoken Rusk, Green, and Huston spoke, 

^Yoaknm, History of Texas. IT. 185. Yoakum makes the mistake of 
accepting unquestioningly Huston's version of this event. The main 
facts related are essentially correct, but it takes no cognizance of the 
intrigues of Green and Huston for the chief command, and the desire 
of Rusk to retain it, largely influenced by them. 

''"Yoakum, History of Texas, II, 184, note. 



As a Texas Revolutionist, 1836-1838 13 

and then the army voted. This resulted in only 179 votes for 
Lamar, and probably 1500 against him, most of the opponents 
being in favor of General Sam Houston. Lamar, in his report 
to President Burnet, July 17, said: 

Everything is in the utmost confusion and rebellion. On my 
arrival I was informed that I could not be recognized as Com- 
mander in Chief. I proposed to speak to the soldiers, and did 
so, but was answered by Eusk, Green, and Felix Houston, who car- 
ried the popular current against me. I had an open rupture 
with Genl Eusk, believing it to be the secret arrangements of his 
to supplant me. Some hostile correspondence ensued; which in- 
stead of leading to further diflfieulty, has resulted in this arrange- 
ment, viz, that he is to recognize my orders in the future; that 
the regulars and about 6 or 8 volunteer companies are to march 
to another encampment under my command; where I shall issue 
my orders as Commander in Ciiief to the balance of the army of 
Texas, and if Green and Felix Houston still maintain their present 
attitude of rebellion to my authority, I shall punish them by 
Court Martial if possible, and if not shall report them to Con- 
gress. You will perceive from this dreadful state of affairs the 
high and absolute necessity of convening a Congress. 

Before he had finished his report, however, the plan outlined 
had become untenable. "Since writing the above," he added in a 
postscript, 

Genl Eusk has reed a letter from Genl Greene stating his de- 
termination not to obey any orders issued by virtue of my author- 
ity denying the validity and constitutionality of my appointment. 
Genl Eusk says he will now stand by me in defense of the Civil 
authority; he sees his own power departing as well as mine; 
the whole has been produced by his desire for promotion, and 
finding that his new allies are not aiming at his support but at 
their own aggrandizement, he is willing to cooperate with me; 
but I fear that nothing that he can now do will be of any service 
in the cause of restoring tliat authority which his previous con- 
duct has prostrated."*^ 

Eealizing the hopelessness of securing control of the army with 
Green and Huston intriguing against liim, Lamar withdrew. The 
failure of the Mexicans to make the threatened invasion caused the 
army to become reduced shortly after, and apparently no ill re- 
sults followed the mutiny. That the opposition of the array was 

^"Lamar Papers, No. 414. 



14 Miraheau Buonaparte Lamar 

not due to any unpopularity of Lamar is evident, for in spite of 
this seeming reverse he continued to hold the esteem of the people 
for a number of yeais, receiving in succession election to the Vice- 
Presidency and the Presidency. 

On July 23, 1836, President Burnet issued a proclamation call- 
ing for the election of a President, Vice-President, and Congress. 
At the same time the voters were to vote on the ratification of the 
Constitution which had been adopted by the Convention in March, 
and to decide upon the question of annexation to the United States. 
The election resulted in the choice of Houston as President and 
Lamar as Vice-President. The Constitution was adopted, and the 
vote for annexation, if it could be obtained, was almost unanimous. 
There w^as only a nominal opposition to Lamar, and his majority 
over all opponents was 2,699.^^ 

The Constitution provided for the installation of the new gov- 
ernment on the second Monday in December. The new Congress 
had assembled on the foarth of October, however, and there was 
considerable agitation in Congress for the installation of the Presi- 
dent and Vice-President at an earlier period than that provided 
by the Constitution. Consequently, on October 22, Burnet an- 
nounced his readiness to retire, and as Vice-President de Zavala 
had resigned the preceding day, the Constitutional President and 
Vice-President were inaugurated. Lamar confided to his diary 
the current impression that Burnet had been forced out by Hous- 
ton's activity, and foreshadowed his own failure to get along har- 
moniously with Houston. Pie wrote : 

Houston was so anxious to enter upon the duties of his office, 
that Burnet was forced by the threats of members of Congress 
that if he did not retire for the new President he would be pushed 
out. The Constitutional period for the installation of the Presi- 
dent had not arrived as yet by a month. Houston could not wait. 
Burnet was forced to retire. Austin advised him to do it for the 
.sake of peace; and insinuated that if he did not Congress would 
probably push liim out. This was the first act of the government, 
a palpable violation of the Constitution. That little month Hous- 
ton could not wait; nor could the hungry expectants brook the 
delay who were looking forward to presidential favors."'- 



^^Brown, History of Texas, II, 
^Lamar Papers, No. 521, 



.4.5 a Texas Revolutionist, 1836-1SS8 15 

Lamar delivered his inaugural address to both houses of Con- 
gress on October 22, and on the 21th he addressed the Senate on 
taking his seat as presiding officer. He stated that he was entirely 
lacking in knowledge of parliamentary procedure, but prom- 
ised to be impartial. He said that he could not be expected to 
exercise any influence over legislation, but he wished to call their 
attention to two evils, defamation of the character of opponents, 
and "Party." By party he did not mean taking sides on any 
measure, but organizations for advancing the interests of some 
favorite, thus recalling his own experience with party organization 
in his race for Congress in 1833,^^ 

As presiding officer in the Senate Lamar's duties were not oner- 
ous, and for several months after his inauguration he busied him- 
self collecting material for a history of Texas. The adjournment 
of Congress on December 21, had given him all the time needed 
for this, and he traveled over the Eepublic collecting material 
from original settlers.^* 

In May, 1837, Lamar returned to Georgia for a visit. He 
was received with honor everywhere. Many public dinners were 
given him, and he found all the opportunities he desired for mak- 
ing public addresses. He had hardly arrived in Georgia, how- 
ever, before his friends in Texas began importuning him to re- 
turn. Eichard E. Eoyall wrote him on May 7, urging him to re- 
turn to Texas to look after his presidential prospects.^" Com- 
plaints were made of Houston's incompetency, his excesses in 
drinking and gambling, and his evident wish to retire. Finally, 
the Senate, September 30, 1837, passed in secret session a reso- 
lution "requesting and enjoining" him to return in view of Hous- 
ton's illness and a threatened invasion by the Mexicans.^** He re- 
turned in the latter part of October and resumed his seat as pre- 
siding officer of the Senate on November 8, when he delivered his 
customary address. 

It seems that almost from the beginning Lamar was looked upon 

^Lamar Papers, No. 469. 

"Among his collected papers for this period are Reminiscences of 
Henry Smith, 1788-18.36; Reminiscences of Richard R. Royall, 1835- 
1836; Miscellaneous Notes on the history of Austin and Texas; Peter 
W. Grayson's visit to Mexico to release Austin. 

^'Lamar Papers, No. 550. 

'""Lamar Papers, Nos. 554, 558, 598, 601. 



16 Mirdbeau Buonaparte Lamar 

as the logical successor to Houston in the presidency. The let- 
ters I have referred to all spoke of the necessity for liamar's return 
in order to look after his presidential prospects. The first formal 
move toward putting his name before the people was on December 
1, 1837, when eleven out of the fourteen members of the Senate 
sent him a letter asking him to accept the nomination. They 
wrote : 

In our anxiety to select the most suitable person to fill the office 
of President of this Eepublic, at the expiration of the term of 
General Sam Houston, we are satisfied from a knowledge of your 
character civil and military that you would be his most appropriate 
successor. 

We respectfully request that you would inform us if you will 
permit your name to be used as a candidate for that higli office. 
In making this request we are confident and happy in the belief 
that we express the wishes of a large majority of our fellow 
citizens.^^ 

Before responding to this letter, Lamar, on December 7, wrote 
a note to T. J. Rusk, who had also been mentioned as a candidate 
for the presidency, asking Eusk's intentions with regard to the 
office, and expressing his intention to decline the nomination 
should Eusk desire to run. The action of both of these men under 
these circumstances is so unusual that I feel constrained to quote 
the correspondence in full. Lamar wrote : 

I have just received a letter from several distinguished gentle- 
men, our mutual friends inviting me [to] become a candidate for 
the next Presidency. As you have been spoken of frequently for 
the same high office I am anxious to see you before I give a final 
answer. It is important that harmony at all times should be pre- 
served in our country and at the present period any violent con- 
test for the Chief Magistry could not fail to be extremely preju- 
dicial to the peace and prosperity of the country, but might prove 
fatal to its best hopes. I know that you as well as myself must 
deprecate these consequences, and with a view to avoid them, I 
think it all important that we should have a free and unreserved 
conference and by comparing our views come to some conclusion 
which whilst it may be satisfactory to ourselves will be most con- 
ducive to public interest. I shall be at my room at about 2 o'clock, 
when I hope it will be convenient for you to call upon me. 

^'Lamar Papers, No. 623. The Senators signing this were S. H. Ever- 
itt, J. S. Lester, I. W. Burton, Wm. H. Wharton, E. Raines, A. C. 
Horton, John Dunn, S. C. Robertson, D. Rowlott. G. W. Barnett, and 
Edward T. Branch. 



As a Texas 11 evolutionist, 1836-1838 17 

To this letter Eusk responded on the same day as follows: 

Your note of this morning has been received informing me of a 
request having been made by several distinguished gentlemen to 
you to become a candidate for the Presidency of the Republic at 
the next election and desiring a free and unreserved conference 
between us on that subject before you answer their communication. 
I fully subscribe to the propriety of the course you suggest and 
am proud to say that it gives me another proof in addition to the 
many I have already had of your patriotism and desire to promote 
the harmony and good of the country. From a press of business 
it will not be in my power to call at your room at 2 o'clock this 
evening but I hope you will not on my account have any hesitancy 
in giving your consent to the request alluded to as there is no 
design or desire on my part to have my name before the people 
for any office whatever. As the representative of my country I 
feel bound to discharge to the best of my abilities the duties of 
the Station ; but beyond this my private affairs and domestic obli- 
gations so long neglected imperiously demand my attention and 
will not permit me to think of public life beyond the discharge 
of those military obligations in the hour of danger which I hold 
paramount to all other considerations. But I shall be pleased, 
dear sir, to see your name before the people for the office of Chief 
IVIagistrate and shall be happy to sustain you in your labors for 
the welfare of the country to which we are both under many obli- 
gations for confidence reposed and honors conferred. 

After the receipt of this letter, Lamar replied to the Senators 
accepting their suggestion that he stand for the presidency. He 
expressed his gratitude that the request came from those over 
whom he had presided in the Senate. "I can only say in answer," 
he said, "that I came to this country for the sole purpose of sub- 
serving the great objects of the revolution. Until those objects 
are fully achieved, I do not feel myself at liberty to decline the 
duties of any station, however high or humble to which the voice 
of my fellow citizens may call me."^* 

The nomination of Lamar by the Senate was followed by public 
meetings which nominated him throughout the Republic. The 
first of these was at Richmond, his home town, on April 17, 1838, 
when he and Burnet were nominated. On April 21, a meeting at 
Columbia took similar action. On April 23, a large public meet- 
ing in Galveston nominated Lamar. A large gathering met in 
the Hall of the House of Representatives in Houston on May 19, 

'^Lamar Papers, No. 631; Telegraph and Texas Register, June 2, 1838. 



18 Miraheau Buonaparte Lamar 

and after much oratory adopted resolutions favoring the election 
of Lamar to the presidency. These nominations were all from 
west of the Trinity. On May 10 a public meeting at San Augus- 
tine, in the extreme east, nominated Lamar and Joseph Eowe.^^ 
The opposition was represented by the candidacy of Peter W. 
Grayson, who had been Attorney-General in Burnet's cabinet and 
later commissioner to the United States ; James Collingsworth, the 
first chief-justice of the Supreme Court, and Eobert Wilson. 

The campaign abounded in personalities. Lamar was accused 
of getting more than his legal share of public land,*** which was 
denied by his friends. He was accused of being ineligible for the 
presidency, not having been a citizen for three years. In reply to 
this, he brought out affidavits from men showing that he had made 
a public address at Washington in the summer of 1835 in which 
he announced his purpose of becoming a citizen of Texas. He 
stated, also, that it was strange that after the public service he 
had performed the question of his eligibility should come up.*^ 
The Galveston Civilian, which was especially bitter against Lamar, 
claimed that he was afflicted with partial insanity. To this the 
Telegraph and Texas Register replied that "we sincerely regret 
that his disorder is not contagious, in order that the country might 
reap some benefit from it even before election."*^ An effort was 
made to turn the election along sectional lines, and Lamar, the 
candidate of the West, was constantly urged by his friends in the 
East to concentrate his campaign in that section. 

The election was to be held on September 3. Before that time 
both of Lamar's principal opponents had committed suicide, Gray- 
son by shooting himself at Bean's Station, Tennessee, and Col- 
lingsworth by drowning in Galveston Bay. It seems evident that 
Lamar would have been elected by an overwhelming majority had 
his opponents lived and continued in the race. There was some 
effort made to turn all the opposition to Collingsworth after the 
death of Grayson on July 9, but with little success. The death 
of Collingsworth shortly after that of Grayson made any oppo- 
sition hopeless. Wilson had never been considered seriously in the 

""Telegraph and Texas Register, April 25, May 2, June 2, 1838. 
^"Quoted from the Galveston Civilian, in Telegraph and Texas Register, 
August 4, 1838. 

*^Lamar Papers, No. 746; Telegraph and Texas Register, June 30, 1838. 
^^Telegraph and Texas Register, June 30, 1838. 



As a Texas Revolutionist, 1836-1838 19 

race, and the election resulted in his receiving only 252 votes, vehile 
Lamar received 6,995.*^ The only real contest was for Vice-Presi- 
dent, and D. G. Burnet, on the Lamar ticket, was elected by a 
majority of 776 votes over the combined votes of A. C. Horton 
and Joseph Eowe. 

"Thrall, Pictorial History of Texas, 300; Bancroft, North Mexican 
States and Texas, II, 313; Yoakum, History of Texas, II, 245. 



20 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lama/r 

Chaptee III 

PRESIDENTIAL ADMINISTRATION: DOMESTIC AFFAIRS 

In an address to the Senate, November 5, 1838, on retiring 
from that body preparatory to his inaug-uration as President, 
Lamar stated that it would be inconsistent with the occasion to 
call attention to any specific measures which he might desire, but 
he considered it proper to say that a crisis had arrived when the 
question of separate national existence was to be settled. 

If we will but maintain our present independent position — diffuse 
knowledge and virtue by means of public education — establish a 
sound and wholesome monetary system — remove the temptation 
and facilities to every species of peculation and unrighteous gain — 
make truth, virtue and patriotism the basis of all public pol- 
icy — and secure the confidence of foreign nations by the wisdom 
of our laws and the integrity of our motives, I cannot perceive 
why we may not, within a very short period, elevate our young 
republic into that political importance and proud distinction which 
will not only command the respect and admiration of the world, 
but render it the interest of the nations now discarding our 
friendship, to covet from us those commercial relations which we 
vainly solicit from them.** 

In his inaugural address on December 10, while refraining from 
announcing a policy on domestic affairs, he came back to the idea 
of independence, expressed in his address to the Senate. He said 
that notwithstanding the overwhelming sentiment in favor of 
annexation, he had never been able to discover any advantage, 
either civil, commercial, or political in forming a connection with 
a country already torn with strife. In his first annual message 
to Congress, December 21, he did outline his policy with regard 
to the administration. 

In this message, Avhich was a long one, he recommended the 
appropriation of land for the establishment of a public school 
system and a University; a uniform municipal code; the estab- 
lishment of the Common Law of England by Statute ; the gradual 
return to free trade, and substitution of direct taxation for import 
duties; the establishment of a national bank. He announced that 

^Lamar Papers, No. 867. 



Presidential Administration: Domestic Affairs 21 

his policy towards the Indians would be directly opposite to that 
of his predecessor, who was held to have been too lenient. He 
hoped for recognition of Texan independence by the European 
governments, and for a favorable commercial treaty with the 
United States.''^ 

In discussing the action of Congress on these recommendations 
I shall take up the policies of the President in more detail. As 
there was no further action taken either by the President or Con- 
gress on the subject of a national bank, I shall give at this place 
an outline of the plan suggested by I^amar. 

After expressing strong objections to private incorporated banks, 
and tracing the history of the Second United States Bank, claim- 
ing that the United States Bank had created a sound currency, 
he expressed himself as favoring a national bank owTied exclusively 
by the government. It should be incorporated for a suitable num- 
ber of years, founded on a specific hypothecation of a competent 
portion of the public domain, with the guarantee of public faith, 
and an adequate deposit of specie. It was to be the depository of 
public funds, and was to deal in foreign exchange. He realized 
that real estate was not readily commutable, and that the daily 
needs of commerce and trade needed specie itself, or "that active 
and undoubted credit, of which a known and sufficient deposit of 
the metals, or something equivalent to them, is the proper basis.'' 
He had no plan for securing the specie, but trustfully dismissed 
the matter by saying, "It is believed the proposed bank would be 
amply furnished with that equivalent — and to all necessary extent 
with the actual metallic deposit itself." 

The directors were to be chosen from the best qualified men of 
the country without reference to tlioir political opinions. The 
whole number of directors was to be divided into three sections, 
one section to retire every year without reeligibility until after three 
years. The Congress was to elect the directors by joint ballot, 
and the Senate was to appoint the president of the bank on the 
nomination of the President of the Republic. He ended by say- 
ing that he had spent so much time on it because he felt strongly 
its importance. Notwithstanding the time spent in thinking out 
such a scheme, and the large proportion of the message applied 

"Telegraph and Texas Register, December 26, 1838; Lamar Papers, No. 
948. 



22 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 

to it, no effort was made to follow it up with legislation. It is 
only an instance of Lamar's inability to follow out in practice the 



/. Education 

Next to the plan for a national bank, Lamar devoted the greater 
part of his message to a discussion of the need of public education, 
and to an outline of a policy. The people of Texas had been too 
busy to attend to the establishment of an educational system. Un- 
der the administration of Houston various schools and colleges 
had been chartered, but this in no sense constituted the establish- 
ment of a system of public education aided by the State. Hence, 
Lamar can be credited with initiating and carrying through a 
school system which was to become permanent, and which is the 
foundation of the public school system in Texas today. 

He had given a hint of his attitude toward public education 
in his address to the Senate on November 5. In his message of 
December 21, he said that if it was desired to establish republican 
government upon a broad and permanent basis, it would be the 
duty of Congress to adopt a comprehensive and well regulated 
system of moral and mental culture. Every person had an inter- 
est in public education, he said, and the subject was one in which 
there were no jarring interests involved, and no acrimonious 
political feelings excited. "It is admitted by all," he continued, 
"that cultivated mind is the guardian genius of Democracy, and 
while guided and controlled by virtue, the noblest attribute of 
man. It is the only dictator that freemen acknowledge, and the 
only security which freemen desire." His rec'ommendation was 
that "a liberal endowment which will be adequate to the general 
diffusion of a good rudimental education in every district of the 
Republic, and to the establishment of a University where the 
highest branches of science may be taught, can now be effected 
without the expenditure of a single dollar — postpone it a few 

"His advocacy of a national bank is probably an echo of the struggle 
for a rechartcr of the Second United States Bank. During the Nullifi- 
cation struggle Lamar became definitely estranged from Jackson to the 
extent of adopting some of the principles of the other party. The train- 
ing he received in Georgia from 1825 to 1835 is constantly showing itself 
in his Texas activities. It is interesting to note that Houston, who was 
an ardent admirer of Jackson throughout, ridiculed Lamar's idea of a 
national bank. 



Presidential Administration: Domestic Affairs 23 

vears, and millions will be necessary to accomplish the great 
design.'^ His idea was that an appropriation of lands for that 
purpose would be no hardship, and would constitute the best en- 
dowment for the school system. 

The part of the message relating to education was submitted to 
the committee on education in the House, and early in January 
a bill was presented in harmony with Lamar's suggestions. It 
speedily passed both Houses of Congress and received the signa- 
ture of the President on January 2G, 1839. It provided that each 
county should have, in tracts of not less than 160 acres, three 
leagues of land for primary schools. If a county did not have 
within its limits enough good land vacant, it was entitled to sur- 
vey any unoccupied land in the Eepublic. For two colleges or 
universities fifty leagues were to be set aside, and not to be dis- 
posed of except by lease.*'' On the same day an act was passed 
incorporating the "College of DeKalb." The act named a board 
of superintendents or trustees, exempted the property from taxa- 
tion, authorized the board to employ teachers, suppress nuisances, 
and collect a fine from any liquor dealers within a half mile of 
the college. Four leagues of land were granted by Congress to 
this institution for buildings and apparatus, and for the promo- 
tion of arts, literature and sciences. This was but one of sev- 
eral acts appropriating land in aid of private institutions. 

The act appropriating lands for the benefit of a general school 
system, January 26, 1839, like so many acts of the Eepublic, pro- 
vided no method of administering its provisions. The next ses- 
sion of Congress took steps to remedy this defect. On February 
5, 1840, an act was approved "to provide for securing the lands 
formerly appropriated for the purposes of Education." The Chief 
Justice and the two Associate Justices in each county were desig- 
nated as school commissioners. They were instructed to locate the 
three leagues provided for under the Act of January 26, 1839, as 
early as possible, and to cause to be surveyed and sold an addi- 
tional league for the purchase of scientific equipment, one-half 
of the proceeds to be used for the benefit of an academy in each 
count}'-, and the remainder distributed equally among the common 
school districts. The commissioners were to establish schools, and 
examine applicants for ])ositions as to good moral character and 

*'Gammel, Laws of Texas, II, 135. 



24 Miraheau Buonaparte Lamar 

literary qualifications. They were not to grant certificates to 
teach in academies unless the candidates gave satisfactory evi- 
dence of good moral character, and were graduates of some col- 
lege or university; for common schools the applicants should be 
of good moral character, and be able to teach reading, writing, 
English grammar, arithmetic, and geography."*^ 

It should be said that the generosity indicated by these acts was 
more apparent than real. The settlers in Texas were few and 
land was abundant. Besides, the frontiers were surrounded by 
hostile Indians, who interfered with the survey of the lands. This 
situation, and the lack of specie, led to a delay in securing the 
lands appropriated, and it is probable that only a small quantity 
had been actually taken up by the counties entitled to it when 
the Republic came to an end. The acts are important, however, 
as furnishing the foundation for the educational system subse- 
quently established. 

Another interesting suggestion, which seems to have received 
no attention, is found in Lamar's second annual message, Novem- 
ber 12, 1839, when he advocates the creation of the "Home De- 
partment.'' This was to have supervision of a system of educa- 
tion suited to the condition and policy of the country, "Congress 
at its last session," he said, 

in accordance with a wise, liberal, and enlightened policy, made 
large appropriations of land for the endowment of colleges, 
academies, and primary schools. But the appropriations, though 
liberal, will require the utmost care and management and applica- 
tion, to make them equal to the important work which is to be 
achieved. In their present condition, they can be regarded only 
as the foundation of a fund, which, by judicious measures, and 
well digested plans of operation, may be husbanded and increased 
until it shall be amply sufficient for all the purposes intended; 
but, without such measures, it may be frittered away in useless 
experiments, or swallowed up in the prosecution of visionary 
schemes, which can result in no permanent good to the country. 
It is, therefore, my deliberate opinion that if no other advantage 
was expected to be derived from the establishment of a bureau of 
education, than such as would result from a judicious manage- 
ment of its funds, that advantage alone would be sufficient to 
justify the expenses required for the support of such a bureau. 

*'Ihid., 320-322. 



Presidential Administration: Domestic Affairs 25 

One advantage of this would be a uniform f^ystenl in the schools 
and universities, which would maintain "the sacred principles of 
free institutions.'^ If despotic systems could maintain themselves 
by a system of national education, he asked, why could not a 
representative republic ? He would say to the government, "Open 
wide the doors of knowledge, but keep the key of the temple."'** 

II. Finances 

From the beginning to the end of the existence of Texas as an 
independent repubhc, the most serious problems confronted by 
her statesmen were in raising revenue and providing for the finan- 
cial administration. With little money except that contributed 
by friends in the United States, she became independent in 1836, 
just before the panic of 1837 swept over the United States and 
brought about a failure of that source of funds during the trying 
days when the people of Texas were attempting to establish their 
government. In the absence of specie, many expedients were tried 
to provide funds for the government and as a circulating medium 
for trade. A moderate tariff on imports, an unenforced and \m- 
enforceable direct tax, and a foreign loan were tried, and, these 
all failing to supply funds, the printing presses were put to work 
turning out paper money which depreciated as soon as issued. 
When Lamar assumed the presidency in December, 1838, he found 
all these methods of raising money in use. 

By the ordinance creating the provisional government, passed 
by the Consultation, November 13, 1835, power was granted to 
the General Council "to impose and regulate imposts and tonnage 
duties, and provide for their collection under such regulations as 
may be the most expedient." Under the authority of this pro- 
vision the General Council in December. 1835, passed an ordinance 
creating collection districts and providing for the collection of 
duties on imports at a rate of 25 per cent ad valorem. No duties 
wore collected under this act, however, and on March 12, 1836, 
the constituent convention declared that the provisional govern- 
ment had exceeded its authority in levying import duties, and 
ordered a refund if any duties had been paid.''" 

*''Telegraph and Texas Register, November 27, 18.39. 

^Thriatian, "Tariff History of the Republic of Texas," in Southioestem 
Historical Quarterly, XX, 316. 



26 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 

The first Congress under the Constitution met early in October. 
1836, and in his message to Congress President Burnet said: 

Duties on imports, and in some cases on exports, constitute a 
convenient and economical mode of supplying the public necessi- 
ties, and are less onerous to individuals than almost any other 
impost. . . . When the abundant intrinsic resources of our 
country shall be fully developed, then it may be the glory of Texas 
to invite kindred nations of the earth to an unembarrassed inter 
communication of their diversified products."^ 

Acting in harmony with this suggestion Congress passed a tariff 
act, to become effective June 1, 1837, which was signed by Hous- 
ton, who had, in the meantime, been inaugurated as the first 
President under the Constitution, The policy of the government, 
as indicated by this act, was to place a rather heavy duty on 
luxuries and a comparatively light one on necessities. For ex- 
ample, on wines and silks an ad valorem duty of 45 and 50 per 
cent, respectively, was charged, while on necessities, such as broad- 
stufl's, coffee, sugar, and other articles, the duties ranged from 1 
per cent to 10 per cent ad valorem. All unenumerated articles 
were to pay duty at the rate of 25 per cent ad valorem, as in the 
act of December, 1835, under the provisiohal government. No 
provision was made for collection districts, and no collectors were 

appointed before the enactment of another tariff act in June, 
1837.^2 

On June 12, 1837, a more comprehensive tariff bill was ap- 
proved by the President. The preamble to the act declares its 
purpose to be to raise a public revenue by import duties, to aid in 
defraying the public expenses, sustaining the public credit, and 
securing to the public creditors a fair annual or semi-annual 
interest on their stock in the funded debt. Most foodstuffs were 
admitted free of duty, the list consisting of breadstuffs, including 
corn, wheat, barley, and oats; pickled beef, salted and smoked 
pork, neat's tongue ; potatoes, beets, beans, rice, and vinegar. An- 
other free list included tools of trade, lumber and building ma- 
terials, firearms and ammunition. Luxuries were required to pay 
a high duty, as in the earlier act, and on all unenumerated ar- 

"First Congress, First Sossion, Tlonfic Journal. 13. 

'"Christian, "Tariff History of the Republic of Texas," in Sovthicestern 
Historical Quarterly, XX, 318. 



Presidential Adrtiinisiration : Domestic Affairs 27 

tides the rate was to be 25 per cent ad valorem. This act was 
amended in December by an act which materially extended the 
free list by adding sugar, coffee, tea, salt, iron, steel, household 
furniture, cotton bagging, bale rope, books, stationery, machinery 
of all kinds, wagons, carts, harness, and all necessary farming 
utensils. This act continued unchanged until February, 1840.^^ 

Two direct tax acts were passed before the beginning of Lamar's 
administration, the first on June 12, 1837, and the second on 
May 24, 1838. The first provided for an ad valorem tax of one- 
half of 1 per cent on all property, and for cattle and horses be- 
longing to citizens of the United States, one dollar a head.''* In 
the act of May 24, 1838, the policy of enumerating the property 
was adopted, and the list subject to direct tax included land, 
slaves, horses over two in number, cattle over twenty-five in num- 
ber, watches, clocks, and pleasure carriages. The rate continued 
as in the first act.^'"* 

Opposition to the tariff developed before the system got under 
way. While the act approved December 18, 1837, was under dis- 
cussion in Congress a resolution was introduced in each House 
calling for the abolition of all tariff' laws. The resolution failed 
to come to a vote in the House, but in the Senate it was defeated 
by a vote of seven to three.^® In the Third Congress, which met 
on November 5, 1838, several resolutions similar to the ones in- 
troduced in the preceding Congress were introduced in both House 
and Senate and referred to committees. 

While these resolutions were under consideration by the commit- 
tees the Telegraph and Texas Register, one of the most influential 
newspapers of Texas during this period, came out in support of 
them. The editor, Francis Moore, Junior, in discussing the reso- 
lutions for the abolition of the tariff, said that he had long de- 
sired to see such a measure carried into effect. He thought that 
whatever sums were needed to defray the expenses of government 
were better raised by a direct tax ; that duties were unequal, unjust, 
and evaded by smugglers. The tariff was not necessary to main- 
tain the standard of the currency, he said, as that was maintained 

"/6id., 321-324; Gammel, Laws of Texas, I, 1313, 1314. 1490. 
"Gammel, Laws of Texas, I, 1319. 
"/&id.. I, 1514. 

"'Christian, "Tariff History of the Republic of Texas," in Southwestern 
Historical Quarterly, XX, 325. 



38 Miraheau Buonaparte Lamar 

by the confidence of the people. He thought that free trade would 
be wise, as the adjoining States of the United States and Mexico 
would be induced to get their supplies through Texas, since they 
were suffering under a burdensome tariff system.^^ 

This, then, was the situation when Lamar came into office on 
December 10, 1838. Moderate tariff and direct tax laws were on 
the statute books, but the campaign for free trade and increase of 
direct taxes had begun. In his message to Congress on December 
21, Lamar sympathized with the free trade idea, but advised 
against any change in the tariff laws until some other system 
could be devised as a sustitute. "The decided bias of my mind/* 
he said, 

is for the total abolition of all duties on imports, not only be- 
cause it would comport with that freedom, of commerce so closely 
connected with the fundamental rights of man, but because it 
would be peculiarly adapted to the future condition and policy 
of Texas. While I am aware, that by indirect taxation in the 
nature of a Tariff', the people bear the Ijurden as consumers with- 
out scarcely perceiving it, . . . yet still I look forward to a 
period (I hope near at hand) when we shall be able, aiid will find 
it to our interest, to invite the commerce of the world to our free 
and open ports. This, however, from considerations of a high 
public policy, may not be done until our national independence 
shall be generally acknowledged. The radical policy of Texas is 
an ti -tariff, . . . yet the immediate adoption of free trade as 
is proposed by many of our citizens and statesmen, would in the 
present situation of our country exhibit an f'pparent recklessness 
and imprudence, which could not fail to affect our credit abroad.^® 

The House committee to which had been referred the various 
resolutions and petitions on the tariff agreed with Lamar that no 
change should be made at that time. The only alternatives to 
the tariff as a source of revenue were direct taxes and loans, neither 
of which was advisable or practical at that time — besides, all ar- 
ticles of prime necessity were admitted free of duty. The Senate 
committee, on the other hand, after agreeing that it was inex- 
pedient to abolish the tariff until a loan could be effected or direct 
taxes levied on all lands, examined the arguments for and against 
the tariff, and came to the conclusion that all tariff laws should 

"Telegraph and Texas Register, November 14, 1838. 
"'Third Congress, House Journal, 180, 181; Lamar Papers, No. 361; 
Telegraph and Texas Register, December 26, 1838. 



Presidential Administration: Domestic Affairs 29 

be blotted from the statute books. The strongest argument for 
repeal, they thought, was that the Republic would receive more 
favorable notice from England and a recognition of independence 
if free trade were adopted, and that recognition would expedite 
the making of a loan. Finally, they thought that a land tax was 
much more just and equal. Both Houses having adopted the 
recommendation of the President, all tariff bills were dropped for 
that session of Congress.^" 

The ministers sent to the United States and the European 
countries were instructed to hold out a promise of commercial con- 
cessions in Texas in return for recognition of independence or a 
favorable commercial treaty. On l^ovember 7, 1838, a most fa- 
vored nation agreement was entered into with France, and a year 
later recognition was extended by that country and a treaty of 
amity, commerce, and navigation was drawn up. As a result of 
this treaty, and because negotiations were under way with Eng- 
land, Holland, and Belgium, which might be aided by a reduction 
in the tariff, an act was passed in February, 1840, reducing the 
tariff almost to a free trade basis. The general rate of this tariff 
was 15 per cent ad valorem, payable in any kind of currency, 
and, as depreciation was very great, the actual rate was nearer 3 
per cent. In February, 1841, the rates were increased to 45 per 
cent ad valorem, in order to provide for the depreciation, but the 
specie basis continued as in the act of 1840. This free trade 
policy continued throughout the administration of Lamar. 

To meet the needs of the government under the anticipated re- 
duction of the tariff duties, a comprehensive direct tax law was 
passed. Before this direct taxes had played a minor part in the 
finances of the Republic, with the opponents of a tariff advocating 
a direct tax as more just and equal than an indirect tax. By the 
act of 1840 only a fcAv articles were subjected to an ad valorem 
tax, but a large number to a specific tax. Practically all busi- 
nesses were reached by license taxes. The failure of this measure 
to supply revenue, together with the depreciation, were responsible 
for the revision upward in 1841.*'° 

Another policy adopted by tlio preceding administration for se- 
curing revenue was through a foreign loan. On November 18, 

''"Christian, "TariflF History of the Republic of Texas." as cited, XX, 329. 
'"Ibid., XX, 336-338; XXI, 1. 



30 Miraheau Buonaparte Lamar 

1836, shortly after the constitutional government came into office, 
the first of the five million dollar loan acts was passed. The 
bonds were to run from five to thirty years and bear interest at the 
rate of 10 per cent, and the public faith, the proceeds from land 
sales, and all land taxes after 1838, were pledged to guarantee the 
interest and final redemption.^^ This law was modified slightly 
by an act of May, 1838, in order to make the bonds more salable. 
Commissioners were sent to the United States to sell the bonds, 
but at the accession of Lamar no sales had been made. In his 
message to Congress he expressed himself as favoring a further 
effort to secure a foreign loan, and suggested a modification of the 
previou's acts. 

The law of January 22, 1839, followed out his suggestions. In 
addition to the public faith, the proceeds from land sales, and the 
land taxes, this law pledged the revenues from customs to guaran- 
tee the semi-annual interest, and to create a sinking fund.^^ This 
was modified further by the act of January, 1840, whereby the 
sinking fund was to be $300,000 or more, to be provided from the 
sale of public lands, or if the lands should not be brought on the 
market, from other revenue.*" 

It would be unprofitable to follow out in detail the various 
efforts to secure a loan in the United States and Europe.®* On 
December 24, 1838, James Hamilton of South Carolina, who had 
interested himself in the affairs of Texas and had assisted the 
Texan commissioners under the act of May 16, 1838, was ap- 
pointed as loan commissioner to assist the commissioner appointed 
by Houston. In the fall of 1839, the commissioners succeeded in 
securing from the Pennsylvania Bank of the United States the 
sum of $457,380 in return for the 10 per cent bonds of Texas. 
With this loan in the United States the commissioners went to 
Europe, where for two years they were active in France, Belgium, 
and Holland. At one time in 1841 it seemed that they were about 
to secure the guarantee of the French government for the bonds, 
and the banking house of Lafitte and Company were on the point 

"Gammel, Lmos of Texas, 1, 1092-1093. 

'^Ibid., I, 1484. 

"Ibid., II, 230. 

"An extensive discussion of the loan negotiations is found in H. R. 
Edwards, "Diplomatic Relations between France and Texas," in South- 
western Historical Quarterly, XX, 225-241. 



Pre.ndential Administration: Domestic Affairs 31 

of opening books for their sale, wlien the unfavorable report of 
Saligny, the minister to Texas, caused the French government to 
withhold the guarantee, and the hanking company refused to handle' 
them. All efforts to secure a foreign loan failed, and during the 
succeeding administration the loan acts were repealed.**^ 

During the whole of Lamar's administration optimistic and 
pessimistic reports alternated with regard to the loan negotiations, 
and the people were kept in a state of excitement. It seems cer- 
tain that anticipation of success caused extravagance on the part 
of the government and speculation on the part of tlie people, while 
paper money was issued to be retired by the loan. 

Lamar has been criticised by contemporaries and historians for 
the extensive use of paper money during his administration, but 
in this he was not the first offender.®^ The constitutional gov- 
ernment inherited from the provisional government a debt repre- 
sented by audited treasury drafts amounting to more than a mil- 
lion dollars. The constitutional government passed an act on 
June 7, 1837, for funding these liabilities. This act provided that 
all claims against the government, after having been audited, were 
to be received at par in exchange for ten per cent bonds. Until 
June 12, 1837, audited drafts were received in payment of all 
government dues, though they were not made legal tender as be- 
tween individuals. Before this the depreciation had brought their- 
specie value to fifteen cents on the dollar. The amount of drafts is- 
sued to the beginning of Lamar's administration was $2,105,892.82, 
while during his presidency the amount was $4,881,093.47."' 

The act of June 9, 1837, started Texas upon Jier tempestuous 
experience with paper money. It authorized and required the 
president to issue the promissory notes of the government to the 
amount of $500,000, in denominations of not less than $1 nor 
more than $1,000, payable twelve months after date, and drawing 
interest at 10 })er cent. There were pledged for their redemption 
one-fourth of the proceeds of the sales of Galveston and Mata- 
gorda islands, 500,000 acres of land, all improved forfeited lands, 
and the faith and credit of the government. The notes were to- 
be paid out only for the expenses of the civil departments of the 

"•'Miller, E. T., A Financial History of Texan, 60. 61. 

'"Miller, A Fivnncial History of Texas, 59-82, gives an exhaustive ac- 
count of the public debt of Texas under the Republic. For statistics and 
other material I am indebted to this volume. 

"Miller, op. cit., 65. 



32 Miraheau Buonaparte Lama/r 

government, except $100,000 for the purchase of horses and muni- 
tions of war, and they were receivable in all payments to the gov- 
ernment.*^^ 

At the beginning of Lamar's administration more than $800,000 
of these notes had been issued and were in circulation. It must 
be said, however, that Houston disapproved excessive issue of 
treasury notes, and vetoed a bill to increase the amount to 
$1,000,000 on the ground that an increase would destroy the value 
of the notes already issued."® The depreciation of the notes at 
the beginning of Lamar's administration was from fifteen to fifty 
per cent. 

The first paper money issues of Texas had served a valuable 
purpose as a temporary expedient, said Lamar in his first message 
to Congress, "but experience admonishes us that to urge it further, 
or continue it longer, would be equally injudicious and pre- 
judicial." In the place of currency issued by the government he 
favored currency issued by the national bank, which he advocated 
with so much fervor, and the bank was to issue the currency on 
specie which would be secured through a foreign loan,'^" In spite 
of this apparent turning away from paper money, however, Lamar 
approved, during his administration, bills providing for almost 
unlimited issue of money based on nothing more than the faith in 
the government. 

The contribution of Lamar's administration to tlie paper money 
of the Republic was the "red backs" or non-interest bearing prom- 
issory notes. By the act of January 19, 1839, requiring the 
stock books to be opened for funding the government liabilities, it 
was provided that the notes thereafter issued should not bear inter- 
est, and should be receivable for all government dues. The only 
thing that prevented their use as unlimited legal tender, apparent- 
ly, was the provision in the Constitution against the use of any- 
thing save gold and silver as legal tender. Further additions 
were authorized by the act of February 5, 1840, and the act of 
February 5, 1841, placed no other limit on the issue than the 
amount of appropriations."' From January 1, 1839, to Septem- 

"'Miller, op. cit., 67. 
'"Ibid., 69. 

''"Lamar Papers, No. 361 ; Telegraph and Texas Register, December 26, 
1838. 

"Miller, op. cit., 69. 



Presidential Administration: Domestic Affairs 33 

ber, 1839, there were $1,569,010 of notes issued, and from Sep- 
tember, 1839, to September, 1840, $1,983,790, a total of $3,552,800. 
The expenditures of the Lamar administration are responsible for 
this enormous increase in the public liabilities. 

The first issues of the red-backs were valued only at about 
37.5 cents on the dollar; in November, 1840, they had fallen to 
16.66 cents; and at the close of Lamar's administration in Novem- 
ber, 1841, they varied from 12 to 15 cents. The New Orleans 
quotations were for July 7, 1841, 11 to 13 cents; for September 
22, 13 to 15 cents; for November 24, 12 to 13 cents; for Decem- 
ber 15, 10 to 12 cents; and for January 5, 1842, 8 to 11 cents. 
After 1839 the notes ceased to circulate as a medium of exchange 
and became merely objects of speculation.'^- 

Various funding schemes were undertaken to relieve the condition 
of the currency, but none of them was effective, and the adminis- 
tration came to a close with the coimtry almost bankrupt. 

The explanation for the excessive use of paper money is to be 
found in the consistent expenditure in excess of receipts. There 
was not a )^ear in the period of the Republic when the expenditures 
were not greatly in excess of the receipts. During Houston's ad- 
ministration the receipts from all sources amounted to $260,780 
while the expenditures amounted to $1,777,362. The receipts dur- 
ing the three years of Lamar's administration amounted to 
$1,083,661 and the expenditures for the same time were $4,885,- 
213.'3 

"Miller, op. cit., 70. 

"The following tables compiled hy Professor E. T. Miller of the Uni- 
versity of Texas illustrate the difficulties under which the government 
was working, and explain the financial conditions in the Republic. {A 
Financial History of Texas, 391.) 

Revenues of the Republic 

1836-1838 $ 260.780 

1839 187.791 

1 840 453.235 

1841 442.635 

1842-1844 457.518 

1844-1846 385,023 

Expenditures 

1836 $ 495,295 

1837 945,961 

1838 831.401 

1839 1.504,173 

1840 2,174.752 



34 Mi^abeau Buonaparte Lamar 

The great increase in expenditures during Lamar's administra- 
tion is due to the policy of warfare against the Indians, the great 
increase in the civil list, the payment for the navy contracted for 
under Houston's administration, the removal of the Capital from 
Houston to Austin, and for the Santa Fe expedition. The civil 
list in the first year of Lamar's administration v/as $550,000 as 
compared with $192,000 for the last year of Houston's adminis- 
tration. After the first year the civil list declined, being $347,671 
for 1840 and $255,100 for 1841. The heaviest appropriations 
were for the army in both administrations. The first year of 
Houston's administration $700,000 were appropriated for the 
army. This increased the following year. The first year of 
Lamar's administration the appropriation for this purpose 
amounted to $1,140,000; the second year, $1,056,369; while for 
the third year it dropped to the lowest figure since the beginning 
of the Republic, $111,050. The explanation for the increase in 
1839 and 1840 is to be found in the Indian policy pursued. Dur- 
ing the first two years of his administration Lamar pursued a 
policy of constant warfare against the Indians, expelling some of 
the tribes from the country and punishing others so that they 
removed to the frontier and made only occasional raids against 
the Whites. A comparative statement as to the expense of the 
various Indian policies was prepared by the comptroller in 1854. 
It showed that during Houston's first term $190,000 were ex- 
pended on account of the Indians. Lamar's term cost $2,552,319 

1841 1,176,288 

1842 198.051 

1843 147,274 

1844 147.850 

1845 243,538 

Public Debt 

1836 $1,250,000 

1837 1.090.984 

1838 1.886.425 

1839 3,855.900 

1840 6.241.409 

1841 7.446.740 

1846 9,949,007 

Treasury Note Circulation 

1838 5^ 684,069 

1839 2,013.762 

1840 3,287.962 

1841 2.920,860 

1846 2,674,447 



Presidential Administration: Domestic Affairs 35 

on that account. Houston's second term, 1841-1844, called for 
an expenditure of $94,092, while the term of Jones called for only 
$45,000.'''' The navy represented the next largest appropriation. 
For this object there were appropriated in 1839 the sum of 
$380,455, and in 1840, $525,000." 

The great expenditures and the depreciation of the currency 
during the first two years of Lamar's administration naturally 
reacted on public opinion. The AvMin City Gazette, which was 
established shortly after Austin became the capital, became the 
mouthpiece of the opposition to Lamar which centered in Sam 
Houston. On March 13, 1840, it had this personal criticism of 
Lamar : 

Apart from polities, and as a private citizen, we shall ever re- 
spect him for his literary acquirements, his amiable disposition, 
and unassuming manners ; but, as President of the Republic, we 
must, in common with a large portion of our fellow citizens, con- 
demn many, very many of his acts; not that we blame the heart 
so much as the easy disposition of the man. It is there that the 
mischief lies : he allows others to think — to act for him. 

On October 21, 1840, the same newspaper had this to say with 
regard to the financial condition : 

Texas promissory notes are worth about fifteen cents upon the 
dollar — there is little prospect of a loan — the taxes are not 
promptly paid; and if they were, would only return to the treas- 
ury, at par, that which was issued for less than one-sixth of the 
amount. The continual issue of this sort of currency can have 
but one tendency now, and that is, to depreciate it still further. 
In this exigency, what are we to do ? All the officers of govern- 
ment, from high to low, have been required to receive its issues 
at par, in payment of their salaries. This has not raised it: 
but it has impoverished them; and now an ordinary day laborer 
receives more of it per diem than any civil officer under the es- 
tablishment. . . . 

We are at the lowest round of the ladder. Coiigress will soon 
convene, and the pay of its members will not purchase their food. 
The members cannot live upon patriotism; and many of them 
have nothing else but that and their pay to live upon. 

Houston was a candidate for the presidency from the close of 

"Miller, op. cit., 391; Yoakum, History of Texas, II, 341 n. 
"Miller, op. cit., 391. 



36 Miraheau Buonaparte Lamar 

his first term in 1838 until his re-election in 1841. The consti- 
tutional inhibition of consecutive terms prevented his being a 
candidate for immediate re-election, and his unpopularity at the 
close of his first term would have made doubtful his re-election. 
In order to gain support he put himself at the head of an anti- 
administration party, and used the faults of the administration 
with considerable political skill in developing support for his can- 
didacy. He became a member of Congress in 1839, and his 
opposition to the President as a congressman led to the nomina- 
tion of an opposition candidate in his district in 1840, but Hous- 
ton was returned by a good majority. After his re-election to 
Congress in 1840 he received an invitation from his constituents 
in San Augustine to a public dinner. Declining on account of 
prevailing sickness, he used the opportunity to attack the adminis- 
tration of Lamar and incidentally make political capital for the 
following year. "The approbation expressed by my fellow coun- 
trymen," he said, 

touching my military, executive and legislative duties, which have 
devolved upon me during the important crisis through which 
Texas has passed, is peculiarly gratifying to me. Whether I am 
in private or public station, I must ever feel unceasing devotion 
to the prosperity of my country. Viewing the condition of the 
nation, we have much to deplore; but our situation is not such as 
to induce us to despair of ultimate success and prosperity. The 
finances of the nation have been destroyed by the excessive issue 
of treasury notes; the useless and extravagant expenditures of the 
government ! Nothing profitable has been produced to the coun- 
try! The frontier is unprotected, our citizens have been called 
from their homes with necessity, when their presence was all im- 
portant to their crops — the only means of subsisting their fam- 
ihes ! — the regular army inactive, though millions have been ex- 
pended in its creation ; the Indians harassing our citizens, and 
penetrating our country even to the seaboard ; our credit destroyed ; 
the citizens oppressed by taxes for the want of a sound currency, 
and our national debt increased six-fold within the last year. It 
is vain to attempt concealment of our situation any longer from 
the public eye, — the depression of every class of the community 
proclaims that there is rottenness to the core.'^® 

This picture of conditions was essentially correct, though given 
by a political opponent, who had himself been unable to resist the 

'"^Austin City Gazette, October 7. 1840. 



Presidential Administration: Domestic Affairs 37 

tendencies which had caused the downfall of the administration 
of his successor. This denunciation of the policies of Lamar was 
possibly called forth by Lamar's attack on the preceding adminis- 
tration in defense of his o^vn. Characteristic of this method of 
defense is Lamar's letter in response to an invitation to a public 
dinner extended by some citizens of Galveston. "When I came 
into office," he said, 

the country was in a disorganized condition throughout its various 
departments, civil and military. The public offices were in a state 
of chaos and confusion; the military strength of the nation was 
unknown and unorganized; the army had been reduced to a mere 
skeleton and the navy annihilated. If either had an existence, it 
was nominal merely, and they were incapable of any useful pur- 
poses. Our inland frontier exhibited a melancholy scene of In- 
dian ravages and massacres whilst our entire coast, exposed and 
unprotected, might have been harassed at any moment, and our 
coast blockaded by a single armed vessel. ... To systematize 
the various departments; to establish a strict accountabihty in the 
discharge of the public trust; economize the national resources; 
extend protection to our bleeding frontier; and to place the coun- 
try as speedily as practicable in a state of defence against all its 
enemies, whether savage or civilized, by organizing the militia, — 
creating a new army, resuscitating the navy, and supplying the 
general deficiency of arms, ammunition and n^ilitary stores, were 
among the early objects of my contemplation. . . ?' 

The Fifth Congress assembled on November 2, and the speaker, 
David S. Kauffm.an, in his opening remarks said : 

But seven members of the last House have been deputed by the 
people to join in the labors of this ! The destinies of Texas have 
been committed to other, and, T earnestly trust, abler hands. 
What has produced this extraordinary revolution? We cannot be- 
lieve that our predecessors were dishonest or incapable; but we 
hnoiv that they failed to satisfy the expectations of an anxious and 
confiding people. What was their error? The voice of a nation 
answers: They increased, instead of diminishing, the national ex- 
penditures. Let us, then, gentlemen, with one accord, resolve to 
avoid the rock on which they split.''* 

Lamar recognized the demand for some reform in the matter 
of finances. "Amongst the various duties which will claim the 

"Lamar to citizens of Galveston, Jnne 2, 1840. Lamar Papers, No. 1810. 
"Fifth Texas Congress, House Journal. 5-6. 



38 Miraheau Buonaparte Lamar 

attention of Congress during the present session," he said in his 
annual message, 

there are none more important than those which relate to the 
fiscal affairs of the government. That a system of finance should 
be adopted, if practicable, which will, to some extent, relieve the 
pecuniary embarrassments of the country, is so obviously neces- 
sary, that it can require no argument from me to enforce it. 
The entire expenditures of the government, embracing everything 
that is required, for the successful administration of its civil, mili- 
tary, and naval departments, would probably not exceed four hun- 
dred thousand dollars a year, if these expenditures could be met 
with funds not depreciated in value, and when it is knoMm that 
the revenues of the nation as provided for by law, if faithfully 
collected, would amount annually to nearly one million dollars, it 
would seem that a system might be devised which would not only 
remove present embarrassments, but which could be gradually ex- 
tended to the extinguishment of the national debt. . . . 

In considering this important subject, it is possible that Con- 
gress may find it practicable to lessen the public expenditure with- 
out materially affecting the efficient transaction of the public busi- 
ness. An amalgamation of some of the public offices and a dis- 
continuance of others may possibly be eft'ected, temporarily at least, 
without producing great detriment to the substantial interests of 
the nation, and if it can be done in times of so much pecuniary 
embarrassment, no saving should be considered too small to merit 
attention.'^® 

He had no program to submit, but he recommended retrenchment. 
On November 19, the spirit of Congress made itself felt. On 
that date a joint resolution was introduced requiring the President 
to receive into service a company of volunteers from San Patricio 
county, and it was received with protests by the members of the 
House led by Sam Houston.^" On December 2, Lamar announced 
that Colonel W. G. Cooke had selected a suitable place on Red 
River for a military post, and suggested that his policy of frontier 
defence awaited an appropriation, or it would have to be aban- 
doned. This was answered by a resolution which passed the House 
on the same day providing for a committee of five to be appointed 
to draft a bill to serve as a basis of retrenchment in all depart- 
ments.^' 

''[hid., 25. 

^Tifth Texas Congress, First Session, House Journal, 127-128. 

^'Ibid., 181, 211. 



Presidential Administration: Domestic Affairs 39 

The first act in liarmony witli tbe program of retrenchment was 
passed on December 5, when the salary of the chief justice was 
reduced from $5,000 to $3,000.«- On January 18, 1841, an act 
was passed which reduced the civil list from approximately $550,- 
000 to $450,000, This was accomplished by abolishing the office 
of secretary of the navy and placing his duties on the secretary of 
war; abolishing the ofBce of postmaster general and placing his 
duties on the secretary of state; discontinuing various minor offices 
in the state and war departments.''^ 

The greatest reductions were in the army and navy appropria- 
tions. In spite of the failure of all peace negotiations and the 
threat of a Mexican invasion, and the recommendation of Lamar 
and Burnet, who followed him as Acting President, for prepara- 
tions for an offensive war against Mexico, the two Houses of Con- 
gress failed to agree on an army appropriation bill, and there was 
no appropriation for that year, which resulted in an order by 
Lamar disbanding the regular army.^* At the same time they re- 
fused to appropriate money for military aid to a commercial ex- 
pedition to Santa Fe, an object on which Lamar had set his heart, 
and which he finally undertook in spite of the failure of Congress 
to appropriate funds. For the army and navy the appropriation 
amounted to the sum of $211,050, as against $1,581,369 for the 
preceding year.^^ 

ISTo methods were found at that session of Congress for remedy- 
ing the condition of the currency, and perhaps nothing would have 
availed. The preceding Congress had passed an act providing for 
the issue of eight per cent treasury bonds instead of notes, but as 
these were of no more value in the market than the non-interest 
bearing notes, and as these created an additional obligation for the 
government in the payment of interest, an act was passed in Feb- 
ruary, 1841, providing that no more such bonds should be issued 
after March 1.^® An effort was made to increase the revenue by 
raising the rates of tariff duties, but as we have seen, it resulted 
only in a law raising the nominal rates to accord with their specie 
value. 

*^Gammel. Laws of Texas, II, 553. 

'Hbid., II, 50)9. 

'^Fifth Texas Conjrress, First Session. House Journal, 720-723. 

«^Miller, op. cit., 23. 

•"Gamniol. Lnrvs of Texas, II. 639. 



40 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 

Lamar has been criticized more severely for his financial policy 
than for anything else, and it cannot be claimed that his policies 
resulted in a sound financial system. He recognized this himseK, 
and in every message called attention to the need for a circulating 
medium based on something more than faith in the government. 
It was not his fault that paper money, greatly depreciated, was in 
circulation when he assumed the presidency, but he might be 
blamed for continuing after he came into office a practice that had 
proven itself faulty. It must be remembered, however, that the 
central idea of his financial policies was the securing of a foreign 
loan which was to serve as the capital for a government o^med and 
operated bank, and almost till the end of his administration the 
loan commissioners in Europe held out the hope of securing the 
loan which Lamar considered necessary. It is likely, it seems to 
me, that the loan could have been secured if it had not been that 
the financial stringency in 1837 had caused many of the States 
of the United States to default on the interest on bonds held by 
foreig-n investors, thereby making capital timid in regard to 
American securities. 

It is claimed by his critics that in view of the condition of the 
finances the appropriations were exhorbitant. It is admitted that 
there was an increase in the appropriations, though the nominal 
increase, on account of the depreciation was greater than the real. 
He himself justified the increase in expenditures by saying that 
the army was disbanded when he came into office and he found it 
necessary to create a new one. His administration also had to pay 
for a navy which was contracted for in the preceding administra- 
tion. In my judgment the appropriations for the army were en- 
tirely justified. Undoubtedly the conciliatory policy of Houston 
with regard to the Indians had broken down. Many of the west- 
ern counties were entirely depopulated, and there was an over- 
whelming public sentiment for war with the Indians. Lamar 
could have done no less than adopt a policy of warfare, and that 
called for the creation of an army, the establishment of military 
posts, and the organization of a permanent ranger service. This 
policy justified itself, as I shall show later, and after 1840 the 
Indians retired to the frontier and made only occasional attacks 
on the settlements. 

The term "visionary schemes" which has so often boon apjilied 



Presidential Administration: Domestic Affairs 41 

to the policies of Lamar, the creation of a national bank, the Santa 
Fe Expedition, the naval war against Mexico in alliance with 
Yucatan, and other policies, cannot be justified unless it is meant 
that he did not understand the limitations of the people over whom 
he was ruling. Some of his policies were practical, even though 
they failed from accidental causes. A contrast of his administra- 
tion with that of Houston's first administration results to the 
advantage of Lamar's ; but a comparison with Houston's second 
results in disadvantage to Lamar's. 

It is not the purpose here to go into the second administration 
of Houston, further than to call attention to a few factors bearing 
on the financial history of Lamar's administration which naturally 
fall into that of his successor. The first thing that Houston's 
administration did was to cease the issue of treasury notes and 
take away their legal tender character.*'^ At the same time the 
five million dollar loan acts were repealed. ^^ The repeal of these 
acts, however, showed no constructive policy on the part of Hous- 
ton. The treasury notes had ceased to circulate, and all chance of 
a foreign loan had disappeared, hence it was nothing more than a 
legal ratification of existing fact. The one constructive policy 
was the reenactment of a higher tariff on imports, January 27, 
1842.^^ Foreign or domestic loans were impossible, for the credit 
of Texas was utterly gone, hence it was necessary for the new ad- 
ministration to adopt a program of economy, which happily re- 
sulted in the improvement of general conditions, though still no 
method of funding the notes of the government was arrived at. 

III. Army and Navy 

The War of Independence in Texas was won by a citizen army 
gathered together hurriedly during the pressure of the Mexican 
invasion. The Consultation had passed an ordinance providing 
for the creation of a regular army, the organization of the militia, 
a force of rangers, and an auxiliary force of volunteers for the 
period of the war to be drawn from the United States. The 
militia had not been organized at the beginning of the invasion of 
Texas, and remained unorganized until after the battle of San 

^'Gammel. Lares of Texas, II, 727. 
^/6irf.. II, 954. 
""Ibid., II, 734-737. 



42 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 

Jacinto. Up to the time of San Jacinto, also, there had been few 
enlistments among the regulars, and the auxiliary force of volun- 
teers from the United States arrived too late to participate in the 
San Jacinto campaign. Shortly after this battle volunteers began 
to arrive from the United States and in June the army amounted 
to about twenty-four hundred, and as the "old settlers had gone 
home when the pressure was relieved, the army consisted almost 
entirely of volunteers.®" 

It was this army which had refused to receive Lamar as com- 
mander-in-chief in July, partly because of a belief that General 
Houston was still commander-in-chief, and partly because of the 
intrigue of Felix Huston, Thomas J. Green, and General Eusk. 
The withdrawal of Lamar left the army in the same condition that 
it was in at the time of his appointment, with General Eusk 
acting as commander-in-chief, but with Sam Houston addressing 
communications to the army as commander-in-chief. The army, 
after the threat of a new Mexican invasion had disappeared, began 
to break up, and this was the situation when General Houston 
assumed the presidency in October, 1836. 

The appointment of Eusk as secretary of war left the army un- 
der the command of Felix Huston as senior brigadier-general. In 
January, 1837, President Houston appointed Albert Sidney Johns- 
ton to the command of the army, but when he arrived at the head- 
quarters to take command Huston refused to surrender the com- 
mand, challenging Johnston to a duel. In the duel Johnston was 
severely wounded, and Huston continued in command of the army. 
In May Huston went to the seat of government to secure the 
support of the Congress for an offensive against Mexico. Unable 
to pay the soldiers, and unable to control them under a mutinous 
commander-in-chief, Houston took advantage of the absence of 
Felix Huston from the army, and on May 18 issued orders for the 
furlough of all the volunteers except six hundred.®^ Practically 
all that were left in tlie army at tliat time were volunteers, not 
many more than seven hundred were embodied, and it is certain 

**Barker, "The Texan Revolutionary Army," in Texas Historical Asso- 
ciation Quarterly, IX, 228-261, passim. 

"Williams, Sam Houston, 238; Houston's message to Congress, iSTovem- 
ber 21, 1837; Crane, TAfe of Ham Houston. 288; Yoakum, History of 
Texas, II. 



Presidential Administration: Domestic Affairs 43 

that almost all of these were furloughed. Houston said he re- 
tained only enough to maintain certain important posts."- 

The attitude of Congress towards a military establishment was 
indicated by the passage of laws early in the first session of the 
First Congress for the organization of the militia, for a perma- 
nent force consisting of a battalion of mounted riflemen for fron- 
tier defence, and for a permanent military establishment. By 
the act of December 20, 1836, besides the militia, volunteers, and 
mounted riflemen, the military establishment was to consist of one 
regiment of cavalry, one regiment of artillery, and four regiments 
of infantry, with certain engineers and ordnance officers.®^ The 
whole army was to be commanded by a major-general appointed 
by the President. It was under this act that Johnston was 
appointed major-general, but, as we have seen, he was unable to 
take over the command on account of the opposition of Felix 
Huston. In spite of this riotous condition of the army, however, 
Houston, in his message at the beginning of the called session of 
the First Congress, in May, 1837, said that the army had never 
been in a better condition. He said that the permanent force in 
the field was sufficient to meet all the emergencies of invasions, 
while at the shortest notice the defence of the country could be 
brought into immediate action. He complimented the general 
for the discipline which had been established, and said that by a 
reduction of the supernumerary officers the expense would be only 
$229,032 per year. Less than two weeks later he issued the order 
for disbanding the army by means of furloughs, and from that 
time until the end of his administration there was no organized 
military establishment for the Republic, dependence being placed 
on the militia in any emergency. 

Throughout the administration of Houston there was complaint 
as to his Indian policy, which left the frontiers unprotected while 
he tried to put into effect his principles of conciliation. During 
the greater part of 1838 there were constant Indian raids, and in 
July there was a rather ambitious revolt on the part of the Mexi- 
cans and Indians about Nacogdoches. A hastily collected body 
of volunteers under General Eusk averted the threatened rebellion 
and proceeded to chastise the Indians engaged in the revolt. Un- 

•^Message to Congress, November 21. 1837. 
•'Gammel, Laws of Texas, I, 1223-1226. 



44 Miraheau Buonaparte Lamar 

der these circumstances there was a popular demand for a differ- 
ent policy, and Lamar, in his first message to Congress took this 
into consideration, recommending the creation of a standing army 
to be used for frontier defence.^* 

Congress, willing to cooperate with the Executive, and unmind- 
ful of the fact that there were ample laws on the statute books for 
the creation of a standing army, passed a law providing for a regi- 
ment of eight hundred and forty men, divided into fifteen comr 
panics, for the protection of the northern and western frontiers.^^ 
Colonel Edward Burleson was placed in command, and stationed 
at Bastrop to recruit the proposed army. In spite of the fact that 
a complete staff was organized, and strenuous efforts made to en- 
list enough men to bring the army to efficiency, this army of 
regulars never attained the intended strength, and played a minor 
part in the Indian campaigns of the first two years of Lamar's 
administration. The force of rangers which had been first pro- 
vided for by the General Council proved one of the most effective 
forces in Indian warfare, though they were aided in any important 
campaign by the militia and what few regulars could be gotten 
together. Of the two most important campaigns, the one against 
the Cherokees in 1839 was carried out chiefly by the militia, though 
aided by the regulars imder Colonel Burleson, while the one 
agvainst the Comanches in 1840 was carried out by a force which 
volunteered for that campaign, though it was commanded by a reg- 
ular army officer.^® 

Fortunately for Texas during the first two years of Lamar's 
administration, the Mexicans were occupied with their o\^ti affairs 
and could devote no attention to Texas. In 1839 took place the 
war with France, and the Mexican ports were blockaded. In 
1840 there was civil war between the Federalists and Centralists 
in Mexico, which served to divert the attention of the Mexicans 
from their revolting province. This fact is probably responsible 
for a lack of eagerness in enlisting in the regular army. It was 
this also M'hich made possible the use of the whole army in war 

^"Lamar Papers, No. 361 ; Telegraph and Texas Register, December 26, 
1838. 

''Gamniel, Laws of Texas, II, 1.5. 

'"The details of these Indian campaigns will be given in another chap- 
ter, where I shall attempt to make clearer the use of the army in the 
Indian campaigns. 



Presidential Administration : Domestic Affairs 45 

against the Indians. Under the circumstances, the administra- 
tion was unable to depart materially from the practice of the pre- 
ceding one, and had to depend on the militia hurriedly called to- 
gether to avert a threatened attack or punish one that had already 
taken place. The determination of Lamar to exterminate the 
Indians made necessary the constant mobilization of parts of the 
militia and led to heavy expenditures for the two years of Indian 
warfare. 

The regular army was brought to an end by the action of the 
Congress which sat in 1840-1841. As we have seen, this Congress 
was elected on the issue of retrenchment. As a part of that pro- 
gram the House passed a measure on January 28, 1841, providing 
for the disbanding of the regular army.^'^ The Senate refused to 
concur in this measure, but the House refused to make any ap- 
propriations for its support, and thus accomplished the destruc- 
tion of the regular army. In the absence of an appropriation for 
its support, Lamar directed the comptroller on March 24 to open 
an account on his books for the disbanding of the regular army.®^ 
This was in the face of a threatened Mexican invasion which 
materialized a short time later. Thus Lamar's administration 
closed as it had begun, without an army sufficient for self defense. 

Just as there was no army to speak of when Lamar assumed the 
presidency, so there was no navy at all. Congress and the Presi- 
dent had recognized the necessity of a navy, however, and in 
November, 1836, passed a law authorizing the purchase of a navy.^'' 
The government was unable to find funds for the purchase of the 
vessels provided for, and no action was taken. When the law was 
passed there were still a few naval vessels under the flag of the 
Republic of Texas. Before the close of another year three of the 
four vessels had been lost through capture and wreck, and the 
Congress passed an act in September, 1837, authorizing the pur- 
chase of a five hundred ton ship mounting eighteen guns, two three 
hundred ton brigs of twelve guns each, and three schooners of one 
hundred and thirty tons, mounting five or seven guns each. They 
appropriated $280,000 to pay for the ships, and authorized the 

"Fifth Texas Congress, First Session, House Journal, 631. 
"Yoakum, History of Texas, II. .323, note. 
'"Gammel, Laws of Texas, T, 1090. 



46 Miraheau Buonaparte Lamar 

secretary of the treasury to furnish the purchasing agent with a 
draft on the loan commissioners in the United States.^*'*' President 
Houston appointed Samuel M. Williams as an agent to purchase 
the ships, and Williams at once executed his bond and proceeded to 
Baltimore."- In the meantime the President disbanded the officers 
and men of the navy until the vessels could be secured. 

Williams succeeded in securing in October, 1838, the Charleston, 
for which the Congress appropriated $120,000. A short time later 
he contracted with Frederick Dawson of Baltimore for one ship, 
two brigs, and three schooners. The cost of these ships was to be 
$280,000, but as Texas had no money, the bonds of the govern- 
ment were to be executed by the loan commissioners, and deposited 
in the Bank of the United States of Pennsylvania for $560,000. 
Interest was to be paid at the rate of ten per cent, and in case 
of defaulting on the interest the government of Texas was to for- 
feit the extra deposit of $280,000."- Payment was not made at 
maturity, and the whole amount with interest was claimed and 
ultimately paid by Texas.^ 

Word that the ships had been contracted for arrived shortly 
after Lamar's inauguration, and on January 26, 1839, Congress 
passed and the President approved an act appropriating $250,000 
for the maintenance of the navy for the year.^ It will be seen 
that this navy, which was contracted for under the preceding ad- 
ministration, cost in the neighborhood of $600,000, and with the 
sum appropriated for its maintenance the expense to the Lamar 
administration during its first year was more than $800,000. 

The ships began arriving early in 1839. In March the Charles- 
ton reached Galveston, and her name and flag were changed. She 
was commissioned as the Zavala. On June 27 the schooner San 
Jacinto, the first ship under the Dawson contract, was delivered; 
on August 7, the schooner San Antonio; on August 31, the brig 

""Ibid., I, 1355. 

^"Report of Secretary of the Xavy in Third Texas Congress, First Ses- 
sion, House Journal, 15-20. 

^""Fifth Texas Congress, First Session, House Journal. Appendix, 202- 
204; Dienst, "The Navy of the Republic of Texas" in Texas Historical 
Association Quarterly, XIII, 8. 

^Miller, A Financial History of Texas, 63; Report of the Auditor and 
Comptroller, December 27, 1849, and November 12. 1851. 

^Gammel, Laws of Texas, II, 129. 



Presidential Administration: Domestic Affairs 47 

Colorado. A corvette and a brig were delivered in January and 
April of the following year, making the list complete.^ 

The delivery of the ships of the navy was completed by April,, 
18-10, and Commodore Edwin Ward Moore was placed in com- 
mand with the rank of Post Captain. The greatest difficulty con- 
fronting him in his position was the securing of seamen for the 
ships of the navy. For this purpose some of the vessels proceeded 
to ports of the United States, and attempted to secure sailors there. 
Moore himself in the Colorado went to New York where he ran 
afoul of the United States laws and was prosecuted under the neu- 
trality law of 1818. The American Secretary of State submitted 
to the Texan minister a mass of depositions to prove that Moore 
was violating the neutrality laws of the United States. It was 
charged that Moore "has for some time past been engaged in hiring 
and retaining within the Territory and jurisdiction of the United 
States, citizens of the United States, and other persons to enlist 
themselves in the service of the Eepublic of Texas as mariners or 
seamen on board the said Brig of war, the Colorado."* 

While Moore was still in New York recruiting men, but with 
some of the ships already manned, the Congress passed an act re- 
quiring the President to retire from the service temporarily all 
the fleet except such schooners as were necessary for enforcing the 
revenue laws, and to retain only enough officers and men to carry 
out the purposes of the act. It was provided, however, that if 
Mexico should make any hostile demonstrations on the Gulf, the 
President might order into service any number of the vessels he 
might deem necessary. This act was approved by Lamar on Feb- 
ruary 5, 1840.^ 

President Lamar, however, did not carry out the provisions of 
this law. Acting on the advice of friends,^ he allowed the work 
of fitting the ships for the sea to go on. By June 24 they were- 
ready for service, and on that date they set sail on a voyage which 
carried them to Sisal, Campeachy, Vera Cruz, and other points on 
the Mexican coast. The last of the ships returned on December 9, 

'Dienst, op. cit., 10. 

*Dunlap to Burnet, January 27. 1840 (enclosure) ; Garrison. Dip. Cor. 
Tex., I, 436. 

"Gammel, Laics of Texas, II, 364. 

°See Francis Moore, Jr., to Lamar, March 9, 1840, Lamar Papers, No. 
1741. 



48 Miraheau Buonaparte Lamar 

bringing the body of Treat, who had been acting as secret agent 
of the Texan government in Mexico/ 

In his message in November, 1840, Lamar justified himself for 
disregarding the act of Congress requiring the vessels to be laid 
up in ordinary. He said that it was confidently stated in the 
papers of the United States that Mexico had made contracts for 
the purchase of several vessels of war in Europe, and that she had 
actually secured a steam vessel in England and was about to de- 
scend on the Texan coast and cut off commerce; that under those 
conditions he would have been violating the spirit and intentions 
of the act of Congress instead of carrying it into effect if he had 
caused the seamen already in the service to be disbanded and the 
vessels to be laid in ordinary. Besides, 

Yucatan and Tabasco, lately forming a part of the confederate 
states of Mexico, wearied of the oppressions that followed 
the overthrow of the federal system in that republic, se- 
ceded from the central government, and uniting together pro- 
nounced their determination to be free. Similarity of cir- 
cumstances 'and design naturally creates a sympathy of feel- 
ing, and would prompt this government to regard with pecu- 
liar interest the efforts of the citizens of the southern provinces to 
do precisely what we had so recently accomplished. But consid- 
erations of a higher character suggested the propriety of making a 
demonstration of our naval power on the coast of the new re- 
public. It was expected to ascertain from the authorities estab- 
lished there in what relation this government should regard them, 
and whether their secession from Mexico would terminate their 
belligerent condition towards Texas. ... It was considered 
advisable to communicate to the authorities our friendly disposi- 
tion, and to convey them with such a palpable exhibition of power 
as would render them efficacious and permanent ; and I am grat- 
ified to remark that these professions were readily and kindly re- 
ceived and cordially reciprocated by the new government. 

At the same time, he said, he had felt it his duty to refrain from 
the capture of any Mexican ships as long as negotiations were 
being undertaken for a peaceful settlement of all difiiculties. The 
naval equipments of a country, he asserted, were essentially dif- 
ferent from the military. Competent officers might be chosen from 
among the people for the command of an army, but a navy required 

'Dienst, op. cit., 25. 



Preddential Administration: Domestic Affairs 49 

trained men. "To have disbanded the accomplished and gallant 
officers who have embarked in our naval service," he concluded, 

at the moment when we had reason to believe our enemy was pre- 
paring a naval armament for our coast, would, in the opinion of 
the executive, have not only been indiscreet and impolitic, but 
would, as he believes, have been contrary to the true intention and 
meaning of Congress, as expressed in the act of the last session. 
It is true it might have saved us some expenditure, but it is equally 
true that it might have involved the country in great disaster and 
an irreparable loss of reputation.^ 

It seems that the purposes of the cruise were achieved. The 
rumors that Mexico was preparing to blockade the coast of Texas 
were probably false, and the cruise was unnecessary from that 
standpoint. It did serve, however, to establish friendly relations 
with the federalists of Yucatan, and resulted in an alliance with 
that province the following year against the Mexican government. 
After proceeding to Vera Cruz and delivering letters to Treat and 
receiving others from him to the state department, some of the 
ships proceeded to the Texas coast, remaining only a short time 
for orders, and returned to the Yucatan region. In December 
Moore proceeded up the Tabasco river and captured the town of 
Tabasco, levying on the people the sum of $25,000, which was used 
in refitting the vessels for a longer cruise. The town was turned 
over to the Federalists." The whole fleet was back in Galveston 
in April, 1841. 

From j\Iay to November, 1841, the vessels of the navy were en- 
gaged in the survey of the coast of Texas.^" In the meantime 
Lamar had formed a naval alliance with Yucatan. Under the 
terms of this alliance the fleet of Texas was to be used to aid the 
Federalists of Yucatan against the Centralists who were in con- 
trol of Mexico at that time. On September 18, 1841, Moore re- 
ceived his orders to prepare for the voyage to Yucatan, and on 
December 13 the vessels set sail. Two days later the secretary of 
the navy, George W. Hockley, acting on the orders of President 
Houston, who had been inaugurated on the 12th, directed Moore 
to return to Galveston immediately and await further orders. 

'Fifth Texas Congress, First Session, House Journal, 20-22. 
'Dienst, op. cit., 26. 
"76id., 29. 



50 Mirnheau Buonaparte Lamar 

Moore did not receive these orders until March 10, 1842, and did 
not comply with them, but proceeded to carry out the terms of the 
alliance between Texas and Yucatan. ^^ 

IV. Location of the Permanent Seat of Government 

One of the first problems confronting the Lamar Administration 
was the establishment of a permanent seat of government. During 
the period of the war and the provisional government the seat of 
government had been at various places. In his proclamation call- 
ing the election for officers under the constitution, President Bur- 
net designated Columbia as the meeting place of the First Congress. 
The Congress met there, and on October 22 Houston was inau- 
gurated. Congress and the President were not satisfied with the 
location, because of poor accommodations, and shortly afterwards 
an act was passed temporarily locating the seat of government at 
Houston until the end of the session of Congress which was to 
assemble in the year 1840.'^ 

There was considerable opposition to the location of the capital 
at Houston, which was selected by a joint ballot of the two houses 
by a narrow margin.^ ^ At the time Houston was selected there 
was not a single building there, and though ample buildings for 
the government were promised by the meeting of Congress on May 
1, 1837, they were not provided. Besides, there were complaints of 
the bad streets, the unhealthful conditions in the place, and other 
matters. And as early as August 9, 1837, the question of the 
permanent location of the seat of government was forecast as an 
issue of the campaigns for Congress." 

Eesponding to this sentiment the second Congress passed a joint 
resolution, approved by the President on October 19, providing for 
the election by joint ballot of the two houses of five commissioners 
to select a site for the permanent location of the seat of govern- 
ment. The commissioners were required to give public notice of 
their appointment, and "receive such propositions for the sale of 

"Dienat. op. cit., 37. 

'-Gammel, Laws of Texas, I, 1217. 

"The vote on the fourth ballot was Houston, 21; Matagorda, 4; Wash- 
ington, 14; and Columbia, 1, giving Houston a majority of only two. — 
Winkler, "The Seat of Government of Texas," in Texas Historical Asso- 
ciation Quarterly, X, 165. 

^*Ibid., 185-188, passim; Telegraph and Texas Register, August 9, 1837. 



Presidential Administration: Domestic Affairs 51 

lands as may be made them, not less than one, nor more than six 
leagues of land; and also examine such places as they may think 
proper on vacant lands ; and that they be authorized to enter into 
conditional contracts for the purchase of such locations as they may 
think proper, subject to ratification or rejection by this congress/' 
They were required to make a report to Congress by November 15, 
1837; and in making selections they were to be confined to the 
country between the Trinity and Guadalupe rivers, and they were 
to select no place more than one hundred miles north of the upper 
San Antonio road, nor south of a direct line running from the 
Trinity to the Guadalupe river, crossing the Brazos at Fort Bend.^^ 

The commissioners elected under this act made their report on 
November 20, recommending various places in order of preference, 
based largely on material benefits to be derived in the way of 
bonuses and land. This report was submitted to a select committee 
of the two houses. The committee reported on the 28th recom- 
mending the appointment of a joint committee of both houses to 
visit the various sites suggested during the vacation of Congress 
and report back at the beginning of the next session. Congress 
adopted the report of the committee, and provided by joint reso- 
lution for the election of three members from the House and two 
from the Senate.^® 

The commissioners provided for by this resolution were duly 
elected, and on March 8, 1838, they made a contract with John 
Eblin for the purchase of his league of land, and reserved for the 
government all the vacant lands lying within a radius of nine miles 
of a point near the western boundary of Eblin's League." On 
April 14 the commissioners reported to Congress that they had 
bought the Ebhn League lying on the east bank of the Colorado 
river, just below La Grange. As was the custom, this was sub- 
mitted to a joint committee of the two houses, and the committee 
reported on May 7 without making any recommendations. Two 
days later the houses met in joint session for the purpose of choos- 
ing a site for the permanent government, and the location of 
Ebhn's League was decided upon on the second ballot.^® A bill 

"Gammel, Laws of Texas, I, 1346. 

"Gammel, Laws of Texas, I, 1402; Winkler, "The Seat of Government 
of Texas," as cited, 190-196, passim. 
nVinkler, as cited, 199. 
^"Ibid., 204. 



53 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 

was drawn up embodying this decision, but it was vetoed by Presi- 
dent Houston on the ground that the act locating the temporary 
seat of government provided that it should remain at Houston until 
1840.1^ 

From the foregoing it is obvious that sooner or later the loca- 
tion of a permanent seat of government would become a political 
issue; and this it did., along with other sectional questions, in the 
presidential and congressional campaigns of 1838. Houston was 
from the eastern part of the Eepublic, and it was charged that his 
veto of the bill for locating the capital on the Colorado was due 
to his interest in the East, as well as to a personal vanity which in- 
fluenced him in maintaining the capital at the city of his own 
name. After the nomination of Lamar by members of the Senate 
in December, 1837, and by various meetings over the State in the 
early months of 1838, those interested in the advancement of the 
East through the election of a President representing that section 
petitioned General Eusk to become a candidate for the Presidency. 
When he declined, the same persons appealed to P. W. Grayson, 
who consented to make the race. His death during the campaign 
eliminated the strongest representative of the East, and led to the 
almost unopposed election of Lamar.-" 

The Matagorda Bulletin took the lead in advancing the claims 
of the West to the capital. On March 7, 1838, the editor wrote : 

Several of our citizens have just returned from the up-country 
and the far West, where they have been engaged since the opening 
of the land office, in locating their lands. They bring the most 
flattering accounts of the emigration which is now pouring into 
the interior, with a rapidity altogetlier unparalleled in the settle- 
ment of the country. The new comers we understand are nearly 
all farmers, and are now making extensive preparations to culti- 
vate the soil. The Colorado, up to the base of the mountains, is 
alive with the opening of new plantations, and towns and villages 
seem to be springing up spontaneously along its banks. 

In advocating the election of Lamar to the presidency, the 
editor on March 28, wrote as follows: 

But above all, the character and qualifications of the next chief 
magistrate of the Eepublic of Texas, should be extensively and 

"Second Texas Congress, Third Session, House Journal, 162, 163. 
^"Telegraph and Texas Register, May 19 and 26, 1838. 



Presidential Administration: Domestic Affairs 53 

favourably known, to the people of the United States. Emigra- 
tion, which is so earnestly desired by every good and patriotic 
citizen, and which alone can hasten the rising greatness of this 
flourishing republic, will be checked or promoted by the character 
of the man whom we shall elevate to that distinguished office. 

On August 24, 1838, a correspondent of the Matagorda Bulletin 
urged the election of George Sutherland as senator from Matagorda, 
saying that he was a true representative of the West, and that he 
had supported strongly the location of the seat of government on 
the Colorado in the preceding Congress. "The Seat of Govern- 
ment," he continued, 

will be permanently located during the next two years; and no 
measure can be so big with consequences to the West, and particu- 
larly to the citizens of this Senatorial District as its location on 
the Colorado. It will promote emigration to the West, thereby 
giving protection to the frontier settlements, and enhancing the 
value of our lands. It will also increase most rapidly the settle- 
ment of the lands of the Colorado, and of the countr}^ west of it, 
thereby increasing the capital and interest of that section of the 
country, which will result in important public improvements, in- 
creasing the facilities of commerce and trade. 

Early in the session of the Congress which assembled on Novem- 
ber 5, 1838, efforts began to secure the permanent location of the 
seat of government. By January 14, 1839, a bill had passed 
through Congress and been approved by the President embodying 
the desires of the advocates of a western location. 

This act, as had been the case in the earlier acts, created a com- 
mission consisting of five men, two to be elected by the Senate and 
three by the House, and it was their duty to select a site for the 
location of the capital at some point between the Trinity and Colo- 
rado rivers, and above the old San Antonio road. The name of 
the site was to be Austin, The commissioners were to select not 
less than one nor more than four leagues of land for the site, and 
if it could not be obtained out of the public domain or by donation, 
they were empowered to purchase it, being limited to the price of 
three dollars per acre. They were to enter into a bond with good 
security of one hundred thousand dollars.^^ 

The commissioners, A. C. Horton and I. W. Burton for the Sen- 
ate, and AVilliam ^lenifee, Isaac Campbell and Louis P. Cooke 

"Gammel, Laws of Texas, II. 161. 



64 Miraheau Buonaparte Lamar 

from the House, were elected on January 15th and 16th.^^ Im- 
mediately after the adjournment of Congress on the 24th the com- 
missioners proceeded to their work, and they reported on April 13 
their selection of the town of Waterloo on the Colorado at the foot 
of the mountains. 

It is likely that Lamar exercised a determining influence in the 
selection of the present Austin as the peTmanent seat of govern- 
ment. At the beginning of his administration the Congress was 
practically unanimous in his favor, and there is no doubting his 
influence with its members during the early sessions. Being Vice- 
President during the preceding administration he was well placed 
to Judge of public sentiment as it expressed itself in Congress ; and 
it had become apparent that a more western location than Houston 
was desired. It seemed to be the general impression that a position 
on the Colorado would be chosen, but the exact site was not antici- 
pated. The following extract from an article by an "old settler,'* 
Judge A. W. Terrell, indicates that Lamar first examined and rec- 
ommended the site chosen. 

General Lamar, in the autumn of 1837 or 1838, weary with 
official duties, came to the upper Colorado on a buffalo hunt. He 
procured an escort of six rangers at the old fort that stood in Fort 
Prairie, six miles below where Austin now is. Among them were 
James 0. Rice and William Avery, both of whom long afterwards 
became my clients. From them and from the Rev. Edward Fon- 
taine (a great-grandson of Patrick Henry), then the Episcopal 
minister in Austin, who for years was my friend and neighbor, I 
learned what I am about to state regarding Lamar's buffalo hunt 
and other matters. 

Jacob Harrell was then the only white frontier settler where 
Austin is located, and no white men lived on the waters of tJie 
Colorado above him. His cabin, and a stockade made of split 
logs to protect his horses from the Indians, were built at the mouth 
of Shoal Creek, near the river ford. There Lamar and Fontaine 
(who was his private secretary), and their ranger escort camped 
for the night, and were awakened next morning early by Jake 
Harrell's little son, who told them that the prairie was full of 
buffalo. Lamar and his men were soon in the saddle, and after 
killing all the buffalo they wanted were assembled by a recall 
sounded by the bugler on the very hill where now stands the State 
Capitol building. Lamar, while looking from that hill on the 
valley covered with wild rye, — the mountains up the river, and the 

"Third Texas Congress, Senate Journal, 108; House Journal, 358. 



Presidential Adrmnistratton : Domestic Affairs 55 

charming view to the south, remarked, "This should be the seat 
of future Empire." ... 

Wheu afterwards in 1839 Lamar was president he approved the 
Act of Congress of January 16, 1839, which provided for the com- 
missioners to select a site for the Capital. He appointed among 
them A. C. Hcrton'-^ whom I knew quite well, and instructed 
them to go to Jake Harrell's cabin and look carefully at that loca- 
tion. Fontaine was present when the President talked to the Com- 
missioners, and thought that Lamar's admiration of the ground 
near Harrell's cabin had much to do Math the report of the Com- 
missioners.-* 

Whether or not this account represents the facts, I am unable 
to say. It is true, however, that in the report of the commissioners 
of their choice of a site the defense of their selection was based, on 
two of the most prominent of Lamar's policies, the protection of 
the frontier and the necessity for securing the Santa Fe trade. It 
will be remembered that the commissioners were limited to a point 
between the Trinity and Colorado rivers north of the San Antonio 
road. Stating that there was no great choice between the two 
rivers, they said that the town of Waterloo was more favorable in 
their opinion than a point on the Brazos; and then they showed 
their attitude to be in harmony with that of Lamar with regard 
to frontier defense when they said: 

In reference to the protection to be afforded to the frontier by 
the location of the Seat of Government, a majority of the Com- 
missioners are of the opinion that that object will be as well at- 
tained by the location upon one river as upon the other, being also 
of the opinion that within a short period of time following the loca- 
tion of the Seat of Government on the Frontier, the extension of 
the Settlements produced thereby, will engender other theories of 
defence, on lands now the homes of the Comanche and the Bison. 

The commissioners anticipated the time when a great thorough- 
fare should be established between Santa Fe and the Texas sea- 
ports, and between Red River and ]\Iatamoras, and the two routes 
would intersect almost exactly at the seat chosen. It is certain 
that Lamar had this feature in mind when the commissioners left 
Houston on their journey of inspection. William Jefferson Jones 

^'This is an error. Tho Commissioners were elected by the two houses 
of Congress. 

='A. W. Terrell. "The City of Austin from 1839 to 1865," in Texas His- 
torical Association Quarterly, XIV, 113-114. 



56 iHraheau Buonaparte Lamar 

was in Houston some time in January, just before going to his 
station in the army which was being organized at Bastrop. He 
had discussed with Lamar the importance of the Santa Fe trade, 
and after leaving Houston had written to the secretary of war 
along the same lines. On February 8, 1839, he wrote Lamar re- 
iterating his statements with regard to the Santa Fe trade, and 
declaring that he had no doubt that the seat of government would 
be located at the town of Waterloo.-^ The known interest of Lamar 
in frontier defense and the Santa Fe trade, together with the re- 
port by the commissioners favoring the location for those reasons, 
indicates that there was a close understanding between the Presi- 
dent and the commissioners.^*' 

At the time of its selection Waterloo, which was renamed Austin, 
was on the very outskirts of settlement. There were in the town 
itself, according to the Matagorda Bulletin for April 15, 1839, 
only four families, and in another settlement a few miles distant 
there were about twenty. According to this same paper, however, 
immigration was not slow in beginning to flow into that part of 
the State.^^ This paper, in again commending the selection of 
Waterloo, on August 1, 1839, said: 

The most cheering accounts are daily received of the immense 
emigration to the Upper Colorado and western country. We have 
always been satisfied that it was [only] necessary that the beauti- 
ful country situated there should be known to render it very 
shortly the most densely populated part of the Eepublic. The 
location of the seat of government at its present site has had the 
effect to bring it into notice. 

The Telegraph and Texas Register, June 12, 1839, found that 
the location of the capital in that quarter of the frontier had de- 
terred many citizens who had been doubtful about remaining on the 
frontier from leaving. 

Not all the newspapers approved the choice, however. The people 
east of the Trinity would have been glad to have had the capital 
nearer the center of the State. The Houston Morning Star found 
it objectionable because it possessed none of the advantages of a 

^'Lamar Papers, No. 1049. 

^"Tlie full report of the commissioners can be found in Winkler. "Seat 
of Government of Texas," in Texas Historical Quarterly, X, 217-220. 
"Matagorda Bulletin, May 2, 1839. 



Presidential Administration: Domestic Affairs 57 

city, "timber being scarce, water not too abundant, the situation 
remote from the Gulf, and there being no navigable stream near 
it, at least at present, the immediate surrounding country not 
being fertile, and the town being at the end of the road, beyond 
which there is nothing to see/'-*^ 

The original act providing for the location of the capital had 
not provided for the time of removal from Houston to Austin. 
This was remedied a few days later by a supplementary act requir- 
ing the President to proceed, with his cabinet officers, and the 
archives of the government, to the point selected, previous to Oc- 
tober 1, and that the next Congress should convene there on the 
second Monday of the following November.-'' 

The report of the locating commissioners was anticipated by the 
appointment of Edwin Waller as government agent for the new 
city of Austin. He was to survey the lots, provide for their sale 
at auction, and after this was accomplished, he was to superintend 
the construction of the necessary public buildings. Waller was 
entirely successful in all these duties. The surveying began on 
May 31, the sale of lots began on August 1, and by the time the 
officers of the government arrived in October a sufficient number of 
buildings were completed to house the various departments com- 
fortably.^" 

President Lamar and a part of his cabinet arrived in Austin on 
October 17 and were received with elaborate celebrations.^^ The 
Congress assembled as provided for on the second Monday in 
November, and there was a quorum present the first day. Presi- 
dent Lamar sent in his message on November 12, and stated that 
he had great pleasure in meeting the representatives of the people 
for the first time assembled at the permanent seat of government. 
He congratulated them and the country in general that a question 
which had so deeply excited the national legislature had thus been 
put at rest; and sincerely hoped that no similar subject would arise 
in future to abstract their attention from the harmonious consid- 
eration of such matters of general and local policy as might be 
regarded essential to the prosperity of the nation. "That the se- 

^Morning Star, July 27, 1830. 
^"Gamrael, Laics of Texas, II. 

'"Winkler. "The Scat of Govcriiniont of Texas," in Texas Historical 
Association Quarterly, X, 227-233, passim. 
^'Austin City Gazette, October 30, 1839. 



■58 Alirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 

lection of the site now occupied will command universal appro- 
bation/' he said, "is not to be expected. A diversity of opinion 
upon such subjects is the unavoidable result of the diversity of 
interests and local prejudices which must necessarily exist in a 
country so widely extended as ours." He showed his real attitude 
towards the question when he continued: 

But its geographical position, the apparent healthfulness of its 
climate, the beauty of its scenery, the abundance and convenience 
of its material for constructing the most permanent edifices, its 
easy access to our maratime frontier, and its adaptation to pro- 
tection against Indian depradations, thereby inviting settlements 
to one of the finest portions of our country, [afford] ample proofs 
of the judgement and fidelity of the commissioners, an abundant 
reason to approve their choice. That you and others will experi- 
ence some privations which might have been spared if the location 
had been made in a section of the country of greater population 
and improvement is certainly true; but I cannot believe that a 
people who have voluntarily exchanged the ease and luxuries of 
plentiful houses, for the toil and privations of a wilderness will 
repine at the sacrifice of a few personal comforts which the good 
of the nation may require of them.^^ 

It will be remembered that no provision had been made for the 
commissioners to report back to the Congress their findings with 
regard to their location of the capital site ; and before the Congress 
even met the government had been removed from Houston to 
Austin. Those opposed to the location selected attempted to se- 
cure a reconsideration by introducing and supporting a bill pro- 
viding for a plebiscite on the fourth Monday in May, 1840, to 
determine whether or not the seat of government should be located, 
for a period of twenty-five years, at Austin or at the point on the 
Brazos rejected by the commissioners. This led to an excited de- 
bate in which Houston, who had just taken his seat as a repre- 
sentative from San Augustine, was one of the most conspicuous 
figures. The enacting clause was stricken out by a vote of 21 to 
16, a strictly sectional vote. To add to the appearance of per- 
manency the same Congress passed an act for constructing public 
buildings as nearly fireproof as possible.^^ 

The seat of government continued at Austin vmtil the close of 

'-Lamar Papers, No. 361. 

"Winkler, "The Seat of Government of Texas," in Texas Historical 
Association Quarterly, X, 244. 



Presidential Administration: Domestic Affairs 59 

Lamar^s administration. Shortly after the inauguration of Hous- 
ton for his second term in December, 1841, he removed the govern- 
ment to Houston without the consent of Congress, and in spite of 
the demand of the citizens of Austin for a return of the govern- 
ment, he exercised his functions elsewhere. The citizens of Austin 
resisted successfully the removal of the archives, and after the con- 
clusion of Houston's second administration the government re- 
turned permanently to the city of Austin. 



60 Miraheau Buonaparte Lamar 



Chapter IV 

FEONTIER DEFENCE 

I. Relations with Miscellaneous Indian Tribes 

In order to make clear the policy of Lamar in dealing with the 
Indians, it will be necessary to discuss in some detail the methods 
used by his predecessors in attempting to keep the peace. It will 
not be necessary, however, to give a detailed history of the various 
tribes which occupied Texas. It will suffice at this point to say 
that the usual classification used during the days of the Republic 
depended upon the degree of civilization adopted, and the terms 
"Wild Indians" and "'Civilized Indians" were considered as suffi- 
ciently descriptive. Another grouping that was made was the in- 
digenous and immigrant, the latter term meaning the more civil- 
ized tribes which had come from the United States, and including 
the Cherokee and associated bands.^ 

There was an Indian question in Texas from the time that the 
first Anglo-Americans began to arrive. For a dozen years after 
Austin brought his first colonists to Texas, the chronicles are full 
of Indian atrocities. The year 1832, Yoakum tells us, was the 
first in which the settlers had not been attacked often by the 
Indians, and their failure to attack that year was due to the fact 
that the Comanches and Shawnees had had a great battle in which 
so many were killed that they were unable to undertake a war 
against the whites.^ In April, 1833, a convention met at San 
Felipe to petition for a separation of Texas and Coahuila. It was 
asserted that Texas was such a great distance from the center of 
government that no adequate means of protection against the In- 
dians presented themselves, and this was considered a sufficient 
reason for the establishment of a separate state government for 
Texas. The memorial forwarded to Congress by the Convention, 

'H. E. Bolton, Athanase de Mezieres and the Louisiana-Texas Frontier, 
1768-1780. pp. 17-122, has an extensive discussion of the indigenous In- 
dians of Texas. T. M. Marshall, A History of the Westerii Boundary of 
the Louisiana Purchase, 124-140, is a convenient brief account of the 
location and history of the tribes. 

'Yoakum, History of Texas, I, 310. 



Frontier Defence 61 

which closed April 13, 1833, is a gloomy one. It was written 
by David G. Burnet. After enumerating many evils from which 
the people were suffering, due to the lack of a strong local gov- 
ernment, it declared : 

We do not mean to attribute these specific disasters to the imion 
with Coahuila, for we know they transpired long anterior to the 
consummation of that union. But we do maintain that the same 
political causes, the same want of protection and encouragement, 
the same mal-organization and impotency of the local and minor 
faculties of the government, the same improvident indifference 
to the peculiar and vital interests of Texas, exists now that oper- 
ated then. Bexar is still exposed to the depredations of her 
ancient enemies, the insolent, vindictive, and faithless Comanches. 
Her citizens are still massacred, their cattle destroyed or driven 
away, and their very habitations threatened, by a tribe of erratic 
and undisciplined Indians, whose audacity has derived confidence 
from success, and whose long-continued aggressions have invested 
them with a fictitious and excessive terror. Her schools are neg- 
lected, her churches desolate, the sounds of human industry are 
almost hushed, and the voice of gladness and festivity is converted 
into wailing and lamentation, by the disheartening and multiplied 
evils which surround her defenceless population. Goliad is still 
kept in trepidation; is paralyzed in all her efforts for improve- 
ment; and is harassed in all her borders by the predatory incur- 
sions of the Wacoes, and other insignificant bauds of savages, 
whom a well-organized local government would soon subdue and 
exterminate.^ 

Santa Anna, who was, in effect, dictator in Mexico when Stephen 
F. Austin presented this memorial, refused the request, imprisoned 
Austin, and in October, 1834, announced his purpose to send four 
thousand troops to San Antonio, "for the protection of the coast 
and frontier.'"* In March, 1835, Congress decreed the reduction 
of the militia throughout the Republic to one man for every five 
hundred inhabitants, and the disarming of the remainder. 

Troops dispatched to Texas began to arrive early in 1835, and 
conflicts with the settlers soon began. At Anahuac a collector, 
backed by a small body of troops, attempted to collect tariff duties, 
which the Texans resented.^ This situation, together with the 

'Yoakum, History of Texas, I, 475. 

*E. C. Barker, in Texas Historical Association Quarterly, VII, 250; 
Brown, History of Texas, I, 275. 
'Barker, op. cit., 250. 



62 Miraheau Buonaparte Lama/r 

liostility of the Indians throughout the year, led to the creation of 
committees of safety and correspondence, which led to the calling 
of the Permanent Council in October. The Columbia committee 
wrote to J. B. Miller, the political cliief of the Brazos Department 
suggesting that each municipality be required to furnish twenty- 
five men for use in an Indian campaign, to which Miller replied 
that he was already taking steps to punish the Indians.® The 
committee of San Felipe issued a circular on September 13, in 
which it was stated that the committee considered it important 
that the just and legal rights of the civilized Indians should be 
protected, "but not having any certain information on the subject, 
they can only recommend it to your consideration.'^^ 

The spirit exhibited in the letter of the San Felipe committee 
of safety became the spirit of the Permanent Council, and was 
adopted by each of the revolutionary bodies that governed Texas 
until March, 1836. The Permanent Council on October 18 
adopted the report of a committee for appointing three commis- 
sioners to the civilized Indians. The commissioners appointed 
were Peter J. Menard, Jacob Garrett, and Joseph L. Hood. Sev- 
eral of the Indian chiefs had been invited to convene with the 
whites in their Consultation for the purpose of having their claims 
to lands properly adjusted by that body, but they failed to attend, 
and the three commissioners were therefore instructed to proceed 
to their villages and ascertain the cause of their grievances, and 
to assure them that their case would receive prompt attention as 
soon as the Consultation should reconvene. "This committee are 
of the opinion," said the report., 

that there have been unwarrantable encroachments made upon the 
lands occupied by the said Indians; therefore be it resolved by the 
permanent council of Texas now in session, that Peter J. Menard, 
Jacob Garrett, and Joseph L. Hood, be appointed commissioners 
for the purpose of holding consultations with the different tribes 
of Indians, and giving them such assurances as may be necessary 
for the advancement of their rights and privileges as citizens of 
Texas, and for the purpose of transacting such other business as 
may be necessary to promote the cause of the people of Texas. 

""Texas Revolutionary Documents," in Southern Historical Association 
Publications, VTI, 89, 90. 
'Ibid., VIII, 20. 



Frontier Defence 63 

It was made the duty of the commissioners to co-operate at all 
times with the local committees of safety.** 

At the same time, however, the Permanent Council provided a. 
system of ranger service to keep the Indians in check. On Octo- 
ber 17 a resolution was adopted authorizing Silas M. Parker ta 
employ and superintend twenty-five rangers to guard the fron- 
tiers between the Brazos and Trinity rivers; Garrison Greenwood 
was authorized and required to employ and superintend ten rangers 
on the east side of the Trinity; and D. B. Fryar to employ twenty- 
five rangers for service between the Brazos and Colorado rivers. 
A committee of five men was appointed to report on the details 
of this scheme. The committee reported on the same dav, and 
their report was adopted by the Council. The superintendents 
of the rangers from the Colorado to the Brazos and from the 
Brazos to tlie Trinity were to make their place of rendezvous at 
the Waco village, on the Brazos; those on the east of the Trinity 
were to rendezvous at Houston. The superintendents were to be 
vigilant in carr^'ing the provisions of the resolution into effect, and 
were to have the authoritv to contract for ammunition, and to 
draw on the general council for payment. The companies were to 
select officers, whose duty it was to laake reports to the super- 
intendents every fifteen days, and the superintendent was to report 
to the General Council every thirty davs. The companies ranging 
from the Colorado to the Brazos and from the Brazos to the Trinity 
were to rendezvous at the Waco village every fifteen days unless 
engaged in pursuing Indians, and the companies were to unite 
whenever their officers considered it necessary. Finally, the of- 
ficers were to be "particular not to interfere with friendly tribes 
of Indians on our borders."^ 

The Consultation, which succeeded the Permanent Council on 
November 3, took further steps to secure the good will of the 
Indians. On the day before it adjourned a resolution was adopted 
in which the claims of the Indians to the lands they occupied in 
East Texas was recognized, and the Governor and General Council 
were advised to send commissioners to form a treaty with them. 
On November 15, Henry Smith, who had been elected provisional 
governor, advised the carrying into effect of the recommendation 

*Texas Historical Association Quarterly, IX, 288. 

""Journal of the Permanent Council," in Texas Historical Association 
Quarterly, VII, 260-262. 



64 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 

of the Consultation. On the 22d Smith was empowered by the 
General Council to appoint Sam Houston, John Forbes, and John 
Cameron as commissioners to the Indians. The commissioners 
proceeded to the village of Bowl, military chief of the Cherokees, 
and on February 23, 1836, a treaty was dravra up agreeable to 
the wishes of the Cherokees.^" 

During the progress of the War of Independence the western 
frontier was evacuated by the people before the advancing Mexi- 
can army, hence there is no record of Indian wars in the West. 
In the East the civilized tribes were kept quiet partly through the 
promises held out to them by the Permanent Council and the 
Consultation for a definite settlement of their claims. At the 
same time, however, the Texans deliberately attempted to create 
the impression in the minds of officers of the United States that 
there was danger of an Indian uprising in the East, and it was 
their success in this propaganda that caused General Gaines to 
send some United States troops to Nacogdoches in the summer of 
1836. By the treaty between the United States and Mexico both 
nations were to undertake to keep their Indians quiet, and it was 
this treaty that made possible the intervention of the United States 
in the affairs of Texas. It is interesting to notice that the col- 
onists had attempted to form an alliance with the Indians in the 
spring of 1836.^^ 

With the defeat of the Mexicans in the battle of San Jacinto, 
April 21, 1836, and the subsequent withdrawal of all enemy 
forces from Texas, those who had fled before the invaders returned 
to their homes. Besides, the settlers in search of new lands pushed 
out into territory regarded by 'the Indians as their hunting 
grounds, and the surveying parties early became an object of sus- 
picion, the surveyor's compasses being known by the Indians as 
"land stealers."^- The Indians were very troublesome and threat- 

^"Marshall, A History of the Western Boundary of the Louisiana Pur- 
chase, 139. 

The relations with the Cherokees. their claims to lands in East Texas, 
and their final expulsion from Texas, is so different from the relations 
with the other Indian tribes that I shall treat it in a separate section, 
contenting myself here with a reference to that tribe only when they 
come into the natural development of the subject. 

"E. C. Barker, "The United States and Mexico, 1835-1837," in The 
Mississippi Valley Historical Review, I, 20, 21. 

^-W. D. Wood, "History of Leon County," in Texas Historical Associa- 
tion Quarterly, IV. 204. 



Frontier Defence 65 

ening in the latter part of 1836 and throughout 1837. President 
Burnet liad placed Captain Eobert AI. Coleman in charge of a 
ranging force divided into three or four detachments. One de- 
tachment was on the Trinity, one at the Falls of the Brazos, one 
at the Three Forks of Little Eiver, and one near the mouth of 
Walnut Creek on the Colorado. These detachments fought nu- 
merous battles with the Indians. 

On January 7, 1837, a detachment of fourteen men and boys 
under Lieutenant George B. Erath fought one hundred Indians 
eight miles west of Cameron, killing fifteen. A short time later 
a battle was fought near where Austin now stands, in which the 
Indians were defeated. Several men were murdered at different 
times in Lavaca County. In Fayette County John G. Robison, a 
member of Congress, and his brother, who was visiting him from 
the United States, were killed. On the Trinity, west of Palestine, 
David Faulkenberry, his son Evan, and Columbus Anderson, were 
killed. Massacres occurred during this year at various places in 
East Texas.^" 

The attitude of President Houston, in spite of the evident an- 
popularity of that policy, was one of conciliation throughout his 
administration; and in the early part of his administration he 
had the sympathy and support of Congress. In a message to the 
Senate, November 6, 1836, shortly after his inauguration as Pres- 
ident, he said, 

The friendship and alliance of many of our border Tribes of 
Indians will be of the utmost importance to this Government, keep- 
ing them tranquil and pacific, and if need shall require it, afford- 
ing us useful auxiliaries. 

He suggested the advisability of entering into commercial treaties 
with them, and announced the appointment of commissioners to 
conclude articles of peace, friendship, and intercourse.^* 

In an act to protect the frontier, approved on December 5, 
1836, the Congress took a middle ground between the advocates 
of extermination and conciliation. The President was required 
to raise, with as little delay as possible, a battalion of mounted 
riflemen, to consist of two hundred and eighty men for the pro- 

"Brovvn, History of Texas, II, 129. 

"Secret Journals of the Senate of the Repuhlic of Texas ^ First Bien- 
nial Report of the Texas Library and Historical Commission), 19. Here- 
after this is referred to as Secret Journals. 



66 Mirahmu Buonaparte Lamar 

tection of the frontier. The term of service was to he twelve 
months. The President was also authorized to order out such 
number of the militia as the exigencies of the case might require. 
He was further directed to have such block houses, forts, and trad- 
ing houses erected, as, in his judgment, might be necessary to 
prevent Indian depredations. And finally, it was to be the duty 
of the President to enter into such negotiations and treaties as 
might secure peace to the frontiers; he was to have power to ap- 
point agents to live among the Indians, and to distribute presents 
as he deemed necessary, not to exceed in amount twenty thousand 
dollars.^" That no steps had been taken for the organization of 
the mounted battalion before the middle of the following year, is 
indicated by a resolution, approved June 7, 1837, authorizing the 
President to absent himself from the seat of government for thirty 
days "'to organize and set on foot the corps of mounted gun men, 
authorized to be raised by the act passed the present session of 
congress for the protection of our northern frontier."^® On De- 
cember 10, 1836, a joint resolution was approved authorizing and 
requiring the President to take such measures "as in his judgment 
will effect the release or redemption of our unfortunate prisoners, 
captured by and in the possession of hostile Indians, said to be 
on the waters of Eed Eiver, either by calling for and sending vol- 
unteers against said Indians, or by purchase, treaty or otherwise."^" 
In the spring of 1837 some JVIexican agents visited the various 
Indians on the frontier, promising them arms, ammunition, all 
the booty taken, and peaceful possession of the frontier after the 
Americans were driven out, and by these promises many Indians 
were induced to join the Mexicans. Houston attempted in June 
to organize a mounted force for the punishment of the Indians. 
He ordered Lieutenant A. C. Horton, of San Augustine, to raise 
a force of one hundred and twenty men and as many more vol- 
unteers as were necessary to proceed against the Indians. Nothing 
seems to have come of this, however.^'' On November 10, a body 
of eighteen rangers fell in with a band of one hundred and fifty 
hostile Indians, and after a long battle the Indians were defeated, 
leaving fifty dead, while the loss of the Texans was only lieu- 

^^Laws of the Republic of Texas, I, 53-54. 

^'Ibid., 244. 

"Ibid., 74. 

"Yoakum, History of Texas, II, 228. 



Frontier Defence 67 

tenant Miles and eight men.^'' That was the most serious attempt 
to chastise the Indians during the year. 

In spite of the constant reports of Indian attacks oa defence- 
less settlers, Houston showed bv his message to Congress, November 
21, 1837, that he still considered conciliation the best policy to pur- 
sue. It was of interest to the country, he said, that the relations 
with the Indians be placed upon a basis of lasting peace and 
friendship. Convinced of that truth, it had been his policy to seek 
every possible means to accomplish that object, and give security 
to the frontier; and he considered the indications more favorable 
than they had been at any time before Texas assumed that atti- 
tude. "Measures are in progress with the several tribes," he con- 
tinued, 

which with the aid of suitable appropriations by Congress, may 
enable us to attain the objects of peace and friendly intercourse. 
Apprised of these facts, it is desirable that the citizens of Texas 
should so deport themselves, as to become the aggressors in no 
case, but to evince a conciliatory disposition whenever it can be 
done consistently with justice and humanity. . . . The un- 
deviating opinion of the Executive has been, that from the estab- 
lishment of trading houses on the frontier (under prudent regu- 
lations), and the appointment of capable and honest agents, the 
happiest results might be anticipated for the country. The in- 
tercourse between the citizens and Indians should be regulated by 
acts of Congress which experience will readily suggest.'^" 

In carrying out this policy he insisted on the ratification by the 
Senate of the treaty drawn up with the Cherokees in 1836, and 
the running of. the boundary line under that treaty .^^ He advised 
the settlers to stay at home and not tempt the Indians to hostile 
attacks ; and it was charged by a newspaper in the heat of a polit- 
ical campaign in 1841, that when a committee of men from Rob- 
ertson and Milam Counties asked for protection for the frontier, 
he answered that "he hoped every man, woman and child that 
settled North of the San Antonio Road would be tomahawked.""-^ 

The year 1838 was not different from the preceding year. A 
committee on October 12, 1837, had reported that several of the 
tribes of Indians were at peace, and advised the President to at- 

"Telegrajih and Texas Register. December 23, 1837. 

-"Crane, Life and Select Literary Remains of Sam Houston, 292. 

^■Secret Journals, 35, 36, 37. 

^Telegraph and Texas Register, August 25, 1841. 



68 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 

tempt to make a treaty with the Comanches. At the same time 
they denied the right of the Cherokees to the land which they 
occupied.^^ This was not done, however, and the Comanches con- 
tinued to harass the western frontier, A few instances are here 
given to illustrate the conditions. On August 10 Captain Henry 
W. Kanies with twenty-five men was attacked by 200 Comanches, 
and after a furious fight drove them off with a loss of twenty of 
the assailants. On the Eio Frio, about the same time, a surveying 
party was attacked, and several of the party wounded. On Octo- 
ber 19 a surveying party seven miles west of San Antonio was 
attacked and the surveyors killed. In October also occurred the 
surveyors' fight in Navarro Countv, when twenty-three men fought 
several hundred Indians from 9 o'clock in the morning till 12 
o'clock at night.^* 

In the summer of 1838 the Indians of the East became restless, 
due partly to the efforts of Mexican agents, and partly to the 
failure of the Senate to ratify the treaty with the Cherokees. In 
August took place the curious Nacogdoches rebellion. On August 
4 a party of citizens who went in search of some horses that had 
been stolen found the trail of a large number of Mexicans, On 
the 7th it was reported that there were a hundred or more Mexi- 
cans encamped about the Angelina under the command of Na- 
thaniel Norris, Vicente Cordova, and Cruz. On the 10th it was 
reported that the Mexicans had been joined by 300 Indians, and 
that their force then amounted to 600. The same day they sent a 
letter to President Houston disclaiming allegiance to Texas, and 
set out for the Cherokee nation. Major Augustin was detached 
with 150 men to follow the rebels, while General Rusk marched 
with the main force of the Texans to the village of Bowl, mili- 
tary chief of the Cherokees. Before reaching there he found that 
the insurgents had dispersed.^^ 

No satisfactory explanation has ever been made of the purposes 
that the Mexicans had in mind in this rebellion. On August 20, 
a Mexican by the name of Pedro Julian Miracle was killed on the 
Red River, and on his body were found instructions from General 
Vicente Filisola directed to the Mexicans and friendly Indians in 

^"Secret Journals, 75-79. 
"Brown, History of Texas, II, 143. 

=^Yoakum, History of Texas, II, 245-246; Bancroft, North Mexican 
States and Texas, II, 320; Brown, History of Texas, II, 143. 



Frontier Defence 69 

Texas, together with a diary which Miracle had kept during his 
journey into Texas. The instructions and the diarv taken together 
would indicate that Miracle was visiting the Mexicans and Indians 
in the region of Nacogdoches for the purpose of fomenting a con- 
spiracy, and it was probably due to his activities that the Mexicans 
decided to revolt. One of the documents found on the body of 
Miracle was entitled "Private instructions for the captains of 
friendly Indians of Texas, by his Excellency the General-in-chief 
Vicente Filisola," and it was apparently aimed to control his activi- 
ties with the Indians. He was to invite the principal chiefs to a 
meeting and propose to them that they and their friends should 
take up arms in defence of the Mexican territory in Texas. After- 
wards, he was to meet several from each tribe, and distribute 
among them powder, lead, and tobacco, "in the usual manner." 

You will make them understand that as soon as they have agreed 
in taking up arms, they will be rewarded according to their 
merits; and that so soon as they have taken possession of the 
places that I have mentioned to you, you will advise me by an 
extraordinary courier, giving me a detailed account of the strength 
of the Mexican force, and of the Indian tribes, with the plan of 
attack, that I may be enabled to direct the forces that are to leave 
from this place to the assistance of those who are to operate in 
that quarter. Make them understand that as soon as the cam- 
paign is over, they will be able to proceed to Mexico, to pay their 
respects to the Supreme Government, who will send a commis- 
sioner to give to each possession of the land they are entitled to. 

A second document, apparently written by Miracle himself, was 
addressed, "Companions and friends." In it he called upon the 
Indians to give their service to their country during the campaign 
which was about to take place, and declared that he had been in- 
structed by the general-in-chief to pay particular attention to 
their behavior during the campaign and report it to him. "As 
soon as the news of our operations are made known in Matamoras," 
he ended, "his excellency the general-in-chief will make a forced 
march towards the point where our troops may be, so that in the 
event of any sudden reverse, you will be aided, and a central posi- 
tion fixed upon for your reunion, to be headquarters during the 
remainder of the campaign." 

According to the memorandum book which was found on the 
body of Miracle, he loft Matamoras on May 29, and after a lei- 
surely journey, accompanied by Mexican and Indian followers, he 



70 Miraheau Buonaparte Lamar 

arrived on the Trinity and made camp on July 2. An extract 
from his diary will explain to some extent his activity. 

July 4. Started for "Plazeta creek." Soon after we discov- 
ered the farms of the Choctaw Indians; we directed our course 
towards the rancho of Buenavista. 

July 5. — Don Vicente Cordova presented himself and read the 
communication of his excellency the general-in-chief, Don Vicente 
Filisola. 

July 7. — We expect to meet the Indian chiefs or captains. 

July 8. — About three o'clock in the afternoon Guimon, Boll, and 
their interpreters, made their appearance; but, on account of the 
rain, nothing was done. 

Jiily 9. — At seven o'clock we started to a rancho to hold a con- 
sultation with the Indians. We read the communication of his 
excellency the general-in-chief ; the interpreters being inefficient, 
nothing was done. They left us without any understanding, but 
are to meet them in ten days, when ihey will determine. They left 
an Indian to conduct me to Boll's house; which was done, and we 
reached that place drenched with rain. I am to take the first 
opportunity to speak to Boll, to show him by private instructions; 
but I can do nothing as yet. He has sent me to another of his 
houses where I could conceal myself; for he said that some Amer- 
icans were coming with a communication from Houston, the con- 
tents of which I have not learned. Nothing can be done without 
trouble. [From the ninth until the seventeenth Miracle remained 
concealed.] 

J^dy 17 and 18. — In the afternoon of these days several Indians 
made their appearance for the meeting. 

Jitly 19. — Boll, Dillmoor, and several other captains, came in; 
but the non-arrival of the Kickapoos delayed our meeting. 

July 20. — The meeting took place. War was agreed upon as 
soon as circumstances would permit, and as speedily as possible; 
the amount of our force to be taken immediately; including 
Nacogdoches we have 540 men. At five o'clock p. m. Capt. Sa- 
guano began to raise objections to the making of any movement 
until the arrival of the army in the country when war could be 
carried on with energy ; but finally it was resolved that our force 
should be in readiness at a moment's warning. At five o'clock 
Boll left us, and all went away, including Cordova and the people 
of Nacogdoches, about eight o'clock in the morning. 

The remainder of the diary records visits to the other tribes, 
and comes to an end wath an entry for August 8.-" 

-"Copies of these documents found upon Miracle were sent to the Amer- 
ican State Department by the Texan Minister, Anson Jones, on December 
31, 1838, with a claim tliat the conditions were made worse on the border 



Frontier Defence 71 

Lamar was aware of the conditions on the frontier, and of the 
unpopularity of Houston's Indian policy, being informed both by 
his own interest as a presidential candidate and by the reports of 
his friends. On June 26, 1838, he received a letter from Eeuben 
H. Roberts of Aransas, supporting his candidacy for the presi- 
dency, saying that the cry of the people was for a President who 
would protect the frontier."-'^ On July 29, William McCraven 
wrote from San Antonio, telling of the dangers from Mexicans and 
Indian marauders, and expressing the popular hope that Lamar's 
administration would defend the frontier.^^ 

On August 24, General Eusk wrote to Lamar from Nacogdoches 
concerning the Cordova rebellion, as follows: 

Dear Genl 

I have received your letter bv Col Bee for which please accept 
my thanks You must excuse me for not having written you 
before but recent events have crowded on me so fast that I have 
had very little time. I will in a few days give you a full account 
of the recent rebellion here it was a deep and well laid scheme 
to involve the country in a general Indian war I have had great 
difficulty in preventing it His Excellency has acted strangely 
indeed "had I been governed by his peremptory orders I have not 
the least doubt that an Indian war would have been now rasfing 
here but a timely demonstration of force by marching six hundred 
horsemen through their Country excited strongly that M^hich can 
only be depended upon in Indians their fear.-** 

Two days later Hugh McLeod, adjutant to General Eusk, wrote, 
saying that the Mexicans had plotted for a general uprising of 
Indians, and but for Eusk's promptness they might have brought 
it about. He criticised President Houston severely for his con- 
duct during the rebellion. "He cramped Genl Rusk in ever way," 
he said, "with his orders, written here, where one could not judge 
what was the true state of affairs at HdQrs."^*' Besides these, 
there were other letters strongly criticising the policy of Houston 
and hoping that Lamar would adopt a different policy with re- 
gard to the Indians. 

On October 22 McLcod reported a renewal of Mexican hostili- 

by the failure of the two governments to run the boundary line. They 
appear printed in 32 Cong.. 2 session, Senate Documents, No. 14, pp. 11-17. 

"Laynar Papers, No. 753. 

^Lamar Papers, No. 772. 

="Rusk to Lamar, August 24, 1838, Lamar Papers, No. 797. 

'"McLeod to Lamar. August 26, 1838, Lamar Papers, No. 800 



72 Miraheau Buonaparte Lamar 

ties, giving an account of the battle of Kickapoo on the 16th, and 
on the 2r)th he wrote that Eusk had become convinced that the 
time had come for a campaifim of extermination against all Indians 
except the friendly ones.^^ On November 17, General Eusk wrote, 
suggesting the creation of a permanent force of five hundred men 
to operate against the Indians. At the same time he suggested 
that Lamar demand the removal of all United States Indians under 
the treaty of 1831 between the United States and Mexico.^^ 

The inauguration of Lamar was to take place on December 10, 
and the stage was set for a declaration of policy different from that 
of Houston, who continued to insist that his policy was the only 
one that promised success. Houston delivered his valedictory mes- 
sage on November 19, and to illustrate the contrast of the attitude 
of the outgoing to that of the incoming President, I shall give 
his policy as he expressed it. Criticising the whites for their ag- 
gression on the Indian lands, Houston said : 

The great anxiety of our citizens to acquire land induced them 
to adventure into the Indian hunting grounds in numbers not 
sufficient for self-protection, and inasmuch as they met with no 
serious opposition in the commencement of their surveying, they 
were thrown ofl' their guard, which afforded the Indians an oppor- 
tunity of taking them by surprise, and hence they became victims 
to their own indiscretion and temerity. 

The executive anticipated the consequences that would result from 
penetrating into the Indian hunting grounds, he said, and had 
done everything in his power to prevent such a course. His per- 
sonal remonstrances were insufficient to control the determination 
of those whose opinions set at naught admonitions that could not 
be legally enforced. The Indians, by gaining partial advantages, 
were induced to form more numerous associations, that had ren- 
dered them formidable ; and occasionally acquiring spoil, they had 
been induced to advance upon the settlements in marauding par- 
ties, while the continued surveys within their hunting grounds 
had so much exasperated their feelings that their invasions had 
become formidable to the frontier. He went on to say that the 
system of surveying lands had involved the country in all the 
calamities that had visited the frontier, and suggested that for 
some time to come restrictions should bo placed on surveying be- 

"McLeod to Lamar, October 22 and 25, 1838. Lamar Papers, Nos. 846, 
852. 

"^'Rusk to Lamar, November 17, 1838, Lamar Papers, No. 876. 



Frontier Defence 73 

• 
yond the settlements. He concluded by censuring General Rusk 
for alleged encroachments on the Presidential power during the 
Cordova rebellion, and claimed that that revolt was brought about 
by violation of the rights of the Mexicans and Indians.^^ 

Lamar did not leave the country long in doubt as to his policy 
in dealing with the Indians. "It is a cardinal principle in all 
political associations/' he said in his first message to Congress, 
December 21, 1838, "that protection is commensurate with alle- 
giance, and the poorest citizen, whose sequestered cabin is reared 
on our remotest frontier, holds as sacred a claim upon the govern- 
ment for safety and security, as does the man who lives in ease 
and wealth in the heart of our most populous city." He was not 
anxious to aggravate the ordinary calamities of war by inculcating 
the harsh doctrines of lex talionis toward debased and ignorant 
savages. War was an evil which all good people ought to strive 
to avoid, but when it could not be avoided, it ought to be so met 
and pursued as would best secure a speedy and lasting peace. The 
moderation hitherto extended to the Indians on the border had 
been answered by all the atrocious cruelties that characterize their 
mode of warfare. His solicitude for the due protection of the 
frontier had partially overruled his habitual repugnance to stand- 
ing armies; and in the disturbed state of their foreign and Indian 
relations, the proper security of the country at large, especially 
the peace and safety of the border settlements, seemed to require 
the organization of a regular, permanent, and effective force. 

He showed himself in harmony with the popular sentiment in 
his remarks concerning the Indians in the East. He referred to 
the trouble around Nacogdoches in August, and said that it was 
not all clear to him, but that he was far from conceding that the 
Indians, either native or immigrant, had any just cause of com- 
plaint. He proceeded to discuss the nature of their claims to 
lands in East Texas, showing to his satisfaction that they were 
worthless. He was particularly severe on the Cherokees and 
clearly foreshadowed stern measures with them. He suggested 
the establishment of a line of military forts, announced that agents 
were to be appointed to live in the Indian settlements, and that 
Indians were to be required to submit to Texan criminal laws.^* 

''Kennedy, Texas, II, 316. 

""Telegraph and Texas Register, December 26, 1838; Lamar Papers, No. 
361. 



74 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lama/r 

On the day that he sent this message to Congress he received 
from Congress, and approved, an act "to provide for the protection 
of the N'orthern and Western Frontier." It created a regiment 
comprising 810 men, rank and file, divided into fifteen companies 
of fifty-six men each. The term of service was to be three years, 
at a compensation of sixteen dollars a month, and with a bounty 
of thirty dollars. The regiment was to be divided into eight de- 
tachments, stationed as follows : at or near Eed Eiver ; at or near 
the Three Forks of the Trinity ; at or near the Brazos ; at or near 
the Colorado Eiver; at or near St. Marks Eiver; at the head- 
waters of Cibolo ; at or near Eio Frio ; and at or near the Nueces 
Eiver. At each of these posts fortifications were to be constructed. 
These posts were to become the center of frontier settlement. As 
soon as the positions were selected, three leagues of land were to 
be laid off and surveyed into lots of 160 acres each. Two of the 
lots were to be reserved for the government for the purpose of 
constructing fortifications, one lot was to be given to the soldiers 
obeying the term of enlistment, and the remainder was to be given 
in lots of 160 acres to bona fide settlers in fee simple who would 
live there two years. The act further provided for the establish- 
ment of sixteen trading posts.^'^ 

On January 1, 1839, two other acts for the further protection 
of the frontier were approved. The first authorized the Presi- 
dent to accept eight companies of mounted volunteers for a period 
of six months, and appropriated $75,000 to maintain that force. 
The second appropriated the sum of $5,000 for a company of fifty- 
six rangers for a three months period.^" A little later another 
act was approved providing for three companies of militia for the 
protection of the frontier ;-'^'^ and an January 24, the sum of 
$1,000,000 M'as appropriated for the protection of the frontier.^^ 

In October conditions had become unsettled in the East again, 
and on the 16th the army under Eusk fought a battle with a 
mixed force of Mexicans and Indians at Kickapoo. Shortly after- 
wards the Caddos in the Eed Eiver valley became threatening, 
and just before Lamar's inauguration, Eusk had followed them 
into the United States and disarmed them, thereby incurring a 

'^^Gammel, Laws of Texas, II, 15. 
""Ibid., II, .30, 31. 
''riml., II. 74. 
''Ibid., ir. HI 



Frontier Defence 75 

protest from the government of the United States.^'' These ac- 
tivities made necessary the use of the whole army in the East, and 
the West was left unprotected. On January 2, 1839, Joseph 
Baker, Indian agent at San Antonio, reported that the Comanches, 
Lipans, and Tonkawas were active, and that several children had 
been captured at Gonzales; on the 16th, several citizens sent a 
circular announcing Indian attacks in Eobertson County, and ap- 
pealing for aid.*° 

It is not worth while to enumerate all the Indian attacks during 
this period. It is sufficient to say that a lack of interest in fron- 
tier protection had caused the depletion of the army, and a lack 
of funds at the outset of Lamar's term made impossible the carry- 
ing into effect of the ambitious program that he had announced. 
His response to the appeals for help coming from the western 
counties was that the lack of funds made him unable to do any- 
thing effective in defending the frontier, but that an agent was 
then in New Orleans attempting to sell bonds, and that he would 
apply all the proceeds from the sale to the purchase of ammunition 
and the payment of soldiers.*^ On February 28 he called for vol- 
unteers from eight counties in western Texas for an Indian war. 
Edward Burleson had been appointed a colonel in the regular 
army and stationed at Bastrop, but recruiting was very slow, and 
practically the only defence for the western frontier during the 
year was by volunteer bodies, supported by what there was of a 
regular army. It is likely, however, that the endorsement of an 
aggressive policy by Lamar gave encouragement to the citizens in 
their local warfare with the Indians. 

By far the most troublesome Indians to the Texans were the 
Comanches, who had established themselves on the headwaters of 
the Colorado before the American occupation. Throughout the 
period of the Eepublic, and even after annexation, they made fre- 
quent attacks on the western settlements. President Houston was 
authorized by the Senate to make a treaty with them in 1837, and 
he invited a number of their chiefs to Houston where he had a 
conference with them, giving them presents, and accepting their 

'^Indian Affairs, 1831-1841; McLeod to Lamar, November 21, 1838, 
Lamar Papers, No. 882; 32d Cong., 2d sess., Senate Document, No. 14, 
p. 17. 

*°Lamar Papers, Nos. 982, 1016. 

■•^Lamar to Inhabitants of Robertson's Colony, February 22, 1839, Lamar 
Papers, No. 1084. 



76 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 

promise to keep the peace. In 1838, during the closing year of 
Houston's administration, no effort was made by the government 
to protect the frontier from the Comanches, and the President 
went so far as to criticise the whites for provoking attacks from 
the Indians by their imprudence. Lamar gave to the local move- 
ments the moral support of the administration, and as far as pos- 
sible the actual physical support. I shall follow out, as far as 
possible, the relations with the western tribes, particularly the 
Comanches, reserving a discussion for the relations with the immi- 
grant tribes of East Texas until later. 

In the latter part of January, 1839, three companies of volun- 
teers were organized and placed under the command of Captain 
John H. Moore, and ordered to move against the Comanches. 
They marched up the Colorado. On the 14th of February they 
came to within ten miles of the Indian village, and after dark 
attacked a vastly superior force. After killing about thirty of the 
Indians and losing one killed and six wounded, the Texans drew 
off and did not renew the fight. In the latter part of February, 
a party of Indians committed several murders in the vicinity of 
Bastrop, and were attacked by about fifty Texans. The Texans 
were forced to fall back, but were reinforced by General Burleson 
with thirty men, and after a sharp battle the Indians fled. In 
May, a force of thirty-five men under Captain John Bird discov- 
ered a party of twenty-seven Indians on Little Eiver. They pur- 
sued them until the Indians came up with the main body of from 
two hundred and fifty to three hundred. The Texans managed to 
secure an advantageous position, and beat the Indians off with 
severe losses.*^ 

The punishment that the Indians received in these engagements 
caused them to be more wary in their attacks, and early in the 
following year an effort was made to enter into a treaty with the 
Texans. In February, 1840, some of the Indians came to San 
Antonio for the purpose of making peace with Texas, and were 
told by the commissioners to bring in the captives they had taken. 
The Indians promised to do this, and on March 19, appeared with 
only one captive. Twelve of the chiefs met the commissioners, and 
when called upon to produce their captives produced only one 
little girl. The Texans knew that the Comanches had other cap- 

"Yoakum, History of Texas, II, 261-263; Report of Secretary of War, 
November, 1839. 



Frontier Defence 77 

tives and demanded that they be brought before any treatv would 
be signed. When the chiefs claimed that they had no other cap- 
tives, General McLeod, who was in command of the Texans, or- 
dered a company of soldiers into the house and told the Indians 
they were under arrest, and that they would be detained until 
they sent the rest of their company for the prisoners and brought 
them in. This statement immediately precipitated a fight in the 
council room, which spread to the warriors outside. All the chiefs 
and warriors were killed, and twenty-seven women and children 
were taken prisoner, the Texans losing seven killed and eight 
wounded. The women were kept prisoners while one of their 
number was sent to inform the Comanches what had taken place 
and to say that the Texans were willing to exchange prisoners. 
A few days later she returned with two white captives and four 
or five ]\Iexicans, and proposed to exchange them for her people 
and pay the difference in horses. She was informed that all the 
white prisoners must be brought in.*''* 

In revenge for this battle at San Antonio, the Indians planned 
an extensive campaign. Aided bv the Mexicans and some Kiowas, 
a bard estimated at from four hundred to a thousand Indians 
suddenly attacked Victoria on the evening of August 6. The 
citizens had had no notice of their coming, but they managed to 
take refuge in the center of the town, and put up an effectual 
resistance, losing only a few persons and a considerable number 
of horses. They made another attack the next day, which also 
failed, and then they crossed the Guadalupe Kiver and attacked 
Linnville on the coast. The inhabitants took refuge in a lighter 
on the Gulf, but the Indians burned the town and carried away 
most of the goods and cattle that they could find. In the mean- 
time volunteers had been collecting, who. Joined by regulars and 
rangers, intercepted the Indians at Plum Creek. Here under 
General Felix Huston, the Texans fought and defeated the In- 
dians, killing from fifty to eighty, and recovered all horses and 
prisoners. The Indians were pursued for some distance, but the 
main body made its escape. 

Not content with the defeat of the Indians at Plum Creek, the 
Texans determined to send an expedition into the Comanche coun- 

"Report of McLood to Socretary of War. March 20. 1840; Telegraph 
and Texas Register. April 15. 1840: Bancroft, North Mexican States and 
Texas, II, 324; Yoakum, History of Texas, II, 298; Brown, History of 
Texas, II, 175. 



78 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 

try, and chastise them so that they would make no more attacks 
on the frontiers. Colonel John H. Moore, who had followed the 
Comanches up the Colorado to their village in February, 1839, 
was chosen to lead the expedition. Setting out about the first of 
October with ninety men, besides twelve friendly Lipans, he went 
up the Colorado about three hundred miles to where Colorado City 
now stands. Here the Lipans found the Comanche village in the 
bend of the river, with a bluff to cut off their retreat. McLeod 
sent thirty men to occupy the bluff, and with his main force made 
a surprise attack, which proved fully successful. Only two war- 
riors escaped, and a hundred and thirty-four were found dead on 
the field. Thirty-four squaws and children were captured. The 
Texans had a few wounded but none killed. This ended the or- 
ganized attacks of the Comanches during Lamar's administration, 
though they continued to annoy outlying settlements.** 

II. Relations with the Cherokees 

A group of Indians that furnished a special problem to the 
Texans from their first immigration, consisted of the semi-civilized 
tribes which had emigrated from the United States, consisting of 
the Cherokees, the Coshattoes, the Kickapoos, the Choctaws, the 
Shawnees, the Biloxis, and the Caddoes. Most of these had no 
claim to the soil on which they had settled, and contemporaries 
and historians have agreed on the Justice of their removal from 
Texas. The Cherokees did have some claim, however, or thought 
they did, to the occupancy and government of the region where 
they were settled. The refusal of Lamar to recognize their claims 
as valid, and his determination to treat them as other immigrant 
tribes, make necessary a full discussion of their claims, both under 
the Mexican rsgime and after the Texans had won their inde- 
pendence. 

In the winter of 1819-20, the first party of Cherokees, consist- 
ing of sixty warriors, left their settlements among the Caddoes 
north of Eed River, and came into Texas, settling somewhere along 
the boundary between the Caddoes and the Prairie Indians.*^ By 

"Accounts of this campaign can be found in Yoakum. History of Texas, 
II, 302-305; Bancroft, North Mexican States and Texas, II, 325-326; 
Brown, History of Texas, II, 178-183. Brown as a young man was present 
as a volunteer in the battle of Plum Creek, and writes an interesting ac- 
count of the battle. 

*=E. W. Winkler, "The Cherokee Indians in Texas," in Texas Historical 



Frontier Defence 79 

the latter part of 1824 they were claiming the region lying be- 
tween the Sabine and Trinity Eivers north of the San Antonio 
Eoad, which continued to be their claim until driven from Texas 
in the summer of 1839. Whether or not they had permission from 
the Spanish authorities to settle in Texas it is impossible to say. 
A letter from Eiehard Fields, their chief, to James Dill, alcalde 
at Nacogdoches, just after the revolution which freed Mexico from 
Spanish rule in 1828, indicates that probably some Spanish gov- 
ernor had given them the right to locate there for hunting pur- 
poses. The letter, addressed to the "subsprem Governor of the 
Provunce of Spain," February 1, 1822, asked what was to be done 
with the poor Indians. They had some grants, it said, which were 
given them when they lived under the government of Spain, and 
they wanted to know whether or not the grants would be recog- 
nized by tlie new government. This letter was forwarded to the 
governor by Dill, but it elicited no response.^" 

Early in November, 1822, Fields with twenty-two more Indians, 
visited Don Jos© Felix Trespalacios, the governor of the province 
of Texas, and asked permission for all belonging to his tribe to 
settle upon the lands of the province. Trespalacios entered into a 
temporary agreement with Fields, and sent him to the commandant 
general of the Eastern Interior Provinces at Monterey, Don Gas- 
par Lopez, who, if agreeable was to send him on to the court of 
the Empire, for the purpose of securing a confirmation of the 
grant given by Trespalacios. This agreement constitutes the main 
documentary evidence of the claims of the Cherokees in Texas 
prior to the declaration of the Consultation in 1835, and I shall 
quote it in full. 

Article 1st. That the said chief Kichard [Fields] with five 
others of his tribe, accompanied by Mr. Antonio ]\Iexia and An- 
tonio Walk, who act as Interpreters, may proceed to Mexico, to 
treat with his Imperial Majesty, relative to the settlement which 
said chief wishes to make for those of his tribe who are already 
in the territorv of Texas, and also for those who are still in the 
United States.' 

Article 2d. That the other Indians in the city, and who do not 
accompany the beforementioned, Avill return to their village in the 

Association Quarterly, VII, 96; National Intelliaencer, September 15, 
1820. 

^'Winkler, in Ibid., 99. The original of this letter is in Bexar Archives. 
It is printed in full in Mr. Winkler's article, as cited. 



80 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 

vicinity of Nacogdoches, and communicate to those who are at 
said village, the terms of this agreement. 

Article 3d. That a partv of the warriors of said village must 
be constantly kept on the road leading from this province to the 
United States, to prevent stolen animals from being carried thither, 
and to apprehend and punish those evil disposed foreigners, who 
form assemblages, and abound on the banks of the river Sabine 
within the Territory of Texas. 

Article 4th. That the Indians who return to their Town, will 
appoint as their chief the Indian Captain called Kunetand, alias 
Tong Turqui, to whom a copy of this agreement will be given, 
for the satisfaction of those of his tribe, and in order that tliey 
may fulfill its stipulations. 

Article 5th. That meanwhile, and until the approval of the 
Supreme Government is obtained, they may cultivate their lands 
and sow their crops, in free and peaceful possession. 

Article 6th. That the said Cherokee Indians, will become im- 
mediately subject to the laws of the Empire, as well as all others 
who may tread her soil, and they will also take up arms in defense 
of the nation if called upon so to do. 

Article 7th. That they shall be considered Hispano- Americans, 
and entitled to all the rights and privileges granted to such; and 
to the same protection should it become necessary. 

Article 8tli. That they can immediately commence trade with 
the other inhabitants of the Provin(;e, and with the exception of 
arms and munitions of war, with the tribes of Savages who may 
not be friendly to us.*' 

Fields and his party arrived in Saltillo, the headquarters of the 
commandant general, early in December, and after being enter- 
tained by him for a few days were sent on to Mexico City, arriving 
there early in 1823, at the time when the revolution against the 
jjower of Iturbide was taking place. During the progress of the 
revolution Fields and his companions remained in Mexico, await- 
ing a settlement of their claims. On April 27, 1823, the min- 
ister of relations in the provisional government, announced the 
decision of the government to recognize the agreement between 
Fields and Trespalacios until a general colonization law could be 
passed. "The Supreme Executive Power," wrote Alaman to Don 
Felipe de la Grarza, M-^ho had succeeded Lopez as commandant gen- 
eral of the Eastern Interior Provinces, 

has been pleased to resolve that Eichard Fields chief of the Cher- 

"Record of Translations of Empresario Confracfs. 85. General Land 
Office of Texas. 



Frontier Defence 81 

okee Tribe of Indians, and his companions now in this Capital, 
may return to their country, and that th'^v be supplied with what- 
ever may be necessary for that purpo'^'o. Therefore, Their Supreme 
Highnesses have directed me to inform you, that although the 
agreement made on the 8th Noveuiber 1822 between Richard Fields 
and Colonel Felix Trespalacios Governor of Texas, remains pro- 
visionally in force, you are nevertheless, required to be very careful 
and vigilant, in regard to their settlements, endeavoring to bring 
ihem towards the inteiior, and at places least dangerous, not per- 
mitting for the present the entrance of any new families of the 
Cherokee tribe, until ihe publication of the General Colonization 
law, which will establish the rules and regulations to be observed, 
although the benefits to arise from it, can not be extended to them, 
in relation to all of which, Thc^ir "Highnesses intend to consult the 
Sovereign Congress. That while this is effecting, the families 
already settled, should be well treated, and the other chiefs also, 
treated with suitable consideration, provided that those already 
within our territory respect our laws, and are submissive to our 
Authorities; and finally. Their Highnesses order, that in future 
neither these Indians, nor any others be permitted to come to the 
City of IVIexico, but only send their petitions in ample form, for 
journeys similar to the present, are of no benefit, and only create 
unnecessary expense to the State. All of which I communicate 
to you for your information and fulfillment.'*^ 

With this understanding Fields seemed fully satisfied and returned 
to Texas. 

It is apparent from these documents that Fields received no 
more than a temporary concession, and that a permanent grant 
was left in abeyance. Besides, he was conceded no more than 
tlie right to :;0W his crops, and till his fields without interference 
from the authorities. A year later we find Fields claiming con- 
siderably more than this. In calling a council of all the Indian 
tribes for the purpose of forming a treaty with them, he said : 

The superior government has granted to me in this province 
a territory sufficient for me and that part of the tribe of Indians 
dependent on me to settle on, and also a commission to connnand 
all the Indian tribes and nations that are in the four eastern 
provinces. 

In the council he was to propose treaties with all Indians who 
would agree to submit themselves to the orders of the government, 
and if there were any Avho would not agree, he was to use force to 

**Alaman to De la Garza. April 27. 1823, Record of Translations of Em- 
presario Contracts, 85, 86; Winkler, as cited, 105, 106. 



82 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 

subdue them *^ This letter of Fields's was transmitted to the 
government at Mexico City_, and Alaman responded immediately 
that no such commission and no such grants had leen made, stat- 
ing that the only agreement was for an extension of the provisional 
treaty between Trespalacios and Fields of November 8, 1822.^° 

On August 18, 1824, the general colonization law was passed, 
giving to the States the right to make regulations for the dis- 
tribution of lands within their boundaries. The State of Coahuila 
and Texas passed their colonization law on March 24, 1825. Less 
than a month later, April 15, 1825^, the State granted three con- 
tracts for the settlement of two thousand families in the region 
claimed by the Indians. Eobert Leftwich was to settle eight hun- 
dred west of the Cherokee claim. Frost Thorn four hundred north 
of their villages, and Edwards eight hundred on the lands claimed 
and occupied by the Cherokees. These grants do not, of course, 
prove that the Indians had no claim to the lands. It is more 
likely that the authorities of the State of Coahuila and Texas 
knew nothing of the temporary grant by Trespalacios and con- 
firmed by the authorities in Mexico. The granting of their lands 
to others, however, led to a threatened revolt, which was prevented 
only by earnest efforts on the part of friends of Texas. "^ At the 
same time Fields was assured that he would get suitable lands, 
and he continued to assert all the powers he had claimed before. 

On March 20, 1826, when a general Indian war was threatening, 
Fields wrote to the political chief at San Antonio promising help 
against those Indians, the Comanches and others, who were refus- 
ing to come to terms with the Mexicans. A little later Stephen F, 
Austin was ordered by the commandante at San Antonio to attack 
the Wacoes, Tehuacanos, and other tribes, and he called upon 
Fields for assistance, stating that it would be the means of secur- 
ing the lands which the Cherokees desired. Fields asserted his 
willingness to assist the whites, but said the waters of the Neches 
were too high for them to get across. The attack was postponed 
at that time, but in the autumn Fields asked permission to make 
war on the same Indians, which was granted. Before it could 
take place, however, other matters entirely changed the aspect of 
affairs, and the Cherokees were ready to attack the Mexicans.^^ 

"Winkler, "The Cherokee Indians in Texas," op. cit., 108. 
'"Ibid., 110. 
''Ibid., 117-120. 
'-Ibid., 126. 



Frontier Defence 83 

In the summer of 1825, about the time that Fields was pre- 
paring to secure his lands by force, John Dunn Hunter, a white 
man who had spent several years of his youth in captivity with 
the Indians, and who had wonderful schemes for civilizing the 
Indians, made his appearance among the Cherokees of Texas. 
Hunter counselled friendship with the Mexicans, and proceeded to 
Mexico City to petition for lands for the Indians, arriving there 
on March .19, 1836. It seems to have been the purpose of Hunter 
to secure from the government a grant of land in the vacant parts 
of Texas and Coahuila for the settlement of nearly 20,000 war- 
riors, who were to adopt the Catholic religion, take the oath of 
allegiance to the Mexican Government, devote themselves to agri- 
cultural labor, and defend the frontiers.-"^^' Hunter returned about 
September and announced the failure of his mission, and the 
Cherokees inmiediately began preparations to gain by force what 
they had not been able to get peaceably. 

A council was called, and addressed by Hunter and Fields. The 
speech of Fields, as reported to Stephen F. Austin by P. E. Bean, 
indicates that he was willing to demand perhaps more than he 
believed had been granted. In the language of Bean, it was as 
follows : 

In my old Days I travilid 2000 Miles to the City of Mexico to 
Beg some lands to setel a Poor orfan tribe of Red Peopel that 
looked up to me for Protasion I was Promised lands for them 
after staying one year in Mexico and spending all I had I then 
came to my Peopel and waited two years and then sent Mr. hunter 
again after selling my stock to Provide him money for his ex- 
penses when he got there he Staited his mision to Government 
they said they New nothing of this Richard fields and treated 
him with contampt I am a Red man and a man of onor and 
Cant be eniposid on this way we will lift up our tomahawks and 
fight for land with all those friendly tribes that wishes land also 
if I am Beaten I will Resign to fait and if not I will hold lands 
By the forse of my Red Warriors.-'** . . . 

It was at first the purpose of the Cherokees to attack the Amer- 
icans in Texas, and they were to begin with Edwards's colony, 
which included the lands occupied by them. At about that time, 
however, Edwards had become involved in a controversy with the 

''Ibid., 123. 

"P. E. Bean to S. F. Austin. December 30, 1826, in Austin Papers. 
Winkler, "The Cherokee Indians in Texas." op. cit., 133. 



84 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 

authorities and in the end this resulted in the revocation of his 
grant. Eather than submit to the loss which this would entail, 
Edwards and some of his followers raised a rebellion against the 
authority of .Mexico, declaring the colony independent under the 
name of Fredonia. Hunter thought it best to consult with the 
colonists under these circumstances, and he went to Nacogdoches 
for the purpose. Hunter^s visit resulted in a treaty of alliance 
between the Cherokees and the rebels under Edwards. 

The treaty of alliance as drawn up by Hunter and Fields on 
the part of the Indians and Harmon B. Mayo and Benjamin W. 
Edwards as Agents of the Committee of Independence provided 
that the contracting parties bound themselves into a solemn Union, 
League and Confederation, in peace and war, to establish and de- 
fend their independence against the Mexican United States. The 
boundary between the whites and the Indians was outlined, and it 
was agreed that the territory apportioned to the Indians was in- 
tended as well for the benefit of those tribes living in the terri- 
tory apportioned to the whites as for those living in the former 
territory, and that it was encumbent upon the contracting parties 
for the Indians to offer those tribes a participation in the terri- 
tory.^^ 

It is not my purpose to follow the events connected with this 
rebellion. The other American settlers in Texas not only refused 
to give any assistance to the rehels, but joined the authorities in 
putting them dovni. The Cherokee chiefs were unable to form a 
league of the Indians in Texas, or even to secure the united sup- 
port of their own people. Mexican agents went among the In- 
dians and promised them land if they would refuse to join in the 
movement for independence. Among these agents P. E. Bean was 
the most active. Through his influence the political chief wrote 
a letter to Fields attempting to explain the failure of the govern- 
ment to grant the lands desired, and promising that the grants 
would be made as soon as possible. He failed, however, to detach 
Fields and Hunter from the alliance; but the activity of the agents 
i":mong the Indians themselves was more successful, and the greater 
part of them under the leadership of Bowl and Big Mush went 

'''Footo, Tea-as and the Texans, I, 253-256; Winkler, "The Cherokee In- 
diana in Texas," op. cit., 142. 



Frontier Defence 85 

over to the Mexicans and killed Fields and Hunter in January, 
'1827.5« 

In spite of the promise of lands to Bowl and Big ]\Iush, in order 
to secure their co-operation against the rebels during the Fredonian 
rebellion, no steps were taken to put them in possession of the 
lands selected until 1831, though there was no effort to interfere 
with their peaceful possession. Instead of putting them in pos- 
session of the Edwards grant, the legislature divided that territory 
between David G. Burnet and Joseph Vehlein." 

On April 6, 1830, a Federal act prohibiting the further immi- 
gration of Americans into Texas was passed. As an alternative 
to American settlement of Texas, the law proposed the settlement 
of Mexican families around the Americans already there, thus over- 
coming the isolation of the Americans. General Teran, who had 
become commandant general of the Eastern Interior States, ap- 
pealed to the governor of each State to furnish a certain number 
of Mexican families to settle upon the Texas frontier. The gov- 
ernors failed to respond to this request, and no Mexican families 
were sent. This determined Teran to attempt to settle Indians 
to keep the Americans in check. He decided to begin this by 
settling firmly the Cherokees on the land which they claimed and 
had occupied for several years, hoping thus to stop the American 
advance in this manner. On August 15, 1831, he wrote to Letona, 
the governor of Coahuila and Texas, as follows : 

In compliance with the promises made by the Supreme Govern- 
ment, to the Cherokee Indians, and with a view to the preserva- 
tion of peace, with the rude tribes, I caused them to determine 
upon some fixed spot for their Settlement, and having selected it 
on the head waters of the Trinity, and the banks of the Sabine, I 
pray your Excellency may be pleased, to order that possession be 
given to them, with the corresponding Titles, with the understand- 
ing, that it will be expedient, that the commissioners appointed 
for this purpose, should act in conjunction with Colonel Jos© de 
las Piedras, commanding the militar}' force on the frontier of 
Nacogdoches."^ 

The local officials fell in with the suggestions of the commandant 

"'Winkler. "The Cherokee Indians in Texas," op. cit., 146-150. 

"Bancroft, North Mexican States and Texas, II, 110. 

'"^Record of Translations of Empresario Contracts, 89. Translation by 
Thomas G. Western. Winkler, "The Cherokee Indians in Texas," op. cit., 
154. 



86 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 

general, and on March 22, 1832, the governor instructed the polit- 
ical chief to cause the commissioner, Piedras, to be furnished with 
such stamped paper as he might require for that purpose.^® Before 
Piedras could carry out his instructions he had been expelled from 
Nacogdoches by an uprising of the American settlers, and this 
ended the efforts of the government to put the Indians in possession 
of their lands. Shortly after this Teran committed suicide and 
was succeeded as commandant general by General Vicente Filisola, 
the holder of an empresario grant himself. Governor Letona, bit- 
terly hostile to the Americans, fell a victim of yellow fever and 
was succeeded by Beramendi, a warm friend of Texas.^° 

In 1833 the Cherokees with the assistance of the Americans took 
steps to secure the titles to their lands. A number of the Indians 
proceeded to San Antonio to lay before the political chief a peti- 
tion expressing their desires, and giving the boundary of the lands 
that they wanted. On July 20, he gave them a pass to visit the 
governor at Monclova. On August 21, Governor Beramendi gave 
them a document which promised that they would not be disturbed 
until the supreme government could investigate; but because the 
time limit for the settlement of David G. Burnet's grant had not 
expired he could not put them in full possession.®^ 

The matter was still unsettled in 1835. On March 10, the polit- 
ical chief wrote that the supreme government of the State would 
not let the Cherokees, Coshattoes, and other Indians be disturbed 
until the supreme government could pass on the subject. On May 
12, the congress of Coahuila and Texas passed a resolution de- 
claring : 

Art. 1. In order to secure the peace and tranquility of the 
State, the Government is authorized to select, out of the vacant 
lands of Texas, that land which may appear most appropriate, for 
the location of the peaceable and civilized Indians which may have 
been introduced into Texas. 

Art. 2. It shall establish with them a line of defense along the 
frontier to secure the State against the incursions of the barbarious 
tribes.^ 

This was the last acd of the Mexican government with regard to 

""Winkler, "The Cherokee Indians in Texas," op. cit., 155; Record of 
Translations of Empresario Contracts, 90. 

""Winkler, "The Cherokee Indians in Texas," op. cit., 156, 157. 

"'Ibid., 163. 

^-Laws of Coahuila and Texas, 300. 



Frontier Defence 87 

Indian claims. On November 11 the Consultation adopted articles 
for a provisional government, and declared all land oflSces closed 
until a government could be formed and a land office established 
under that government capable of issuing valid land grants. The 
Indian claims were left as they had been throughout the decade. 
Fields had obtained a shadowy temporary right to land. He had 
claimed much more for this grant than can be allowed. When the 
Mexican authorities failed to put him in possession of the land, 
denying knowledge of him in 1825, he joined with the Fredonian 
rebels against IMexicaa authority. In order to overthrow this re- 
bellion, the jNlexicans promised land to Bowl and Big Mush, with- 
out specifying what lands. The Indians insisted on receiving title 
to the lands lying between the Trinity and Sabine Elvers north 
of the San Antonio Eoad, though it had been officially granted to 
Burnet, Filisola, and others. During 1831-1832 the authorities 
contemplated putting the Cherokees in actual possession of that 
territory, but failed, as we have seen. When Bowl appealed to the 
governor of Coahuila and Texas in 1833, he was given the same 
evasive assurances as had been received before, but Beramendi threw 
some doubt on his right to the lands occupied. Finally, the con- 
gress of Coahuila and Texas proposed to remove them from their 
homes and establish them on the frontiers for defense against the 
hostile Indians. 

The Mexican control of Texas passed with the question in this 
situation. The Indians had been promised land on numerous occa- 
sions, but not the land on which they were located. That land 
had been granted to others, so that the Mexican government could 
not legally grant it to the Indians. The period closed with the 
Indians having no legal claim, and knowing that they had no legal 
claim, to lands anywhere in Texas. 

The Americans in the beginning of their revolt in 1835 recog- 
nized the importance of keeping the Indians quiet. The committees 
of safety had suggested the desirability of coming to some agree- 
ment with the Indians, and the Permanent Council had appointed 
three commissioners to proceed to the Indian villages and discover 
the cause of their grievances and attempt to settle them. The 
Consultation, which succeeded the Permanent Council, went fur- 
ther and recognized the rights of the Indians to the lands they 
had occupied and claimed. "We solemnly declare," said the decla- 
ration passed by the Consultation the day before adjournment. 



88 Miraheau Buonaparte Lamar 

that the boundaries of the claims of the said Indians are as fol- 
lows, to wit, being north of the San Antonio road and the Neches, 
and west of the Angelina and Sabine rivers. We solemnly declare 
that the Governor and General Council immediately on its organi- 
zation shall aj:ipoint commissioners to treat with the said Indians 
to establish definite boundaries of their territory and secure their 
confidence and friendship. We solemnly declare that we will guar- 
antee to them the peaceable enjoyment of their rights and their 
lands as we do our own. We solemnly declare that all grants, sur- 
veys and locations within the bounds hereinbefore maintained, made 
after the settlement of the said Indians, are and of right ought to 
be utterly null and void, and the commissioners issuini'- the same 
be and are hereby ordered immediately to recall and cancel the 
same, as having been made upon lands already appropriated by the 
Mexican government. We solemnly declare that it is our sincere 
desire that the Cherokee Indians and their associate bands should 
remain our friends in peace and war, and if they do so we pledge 
the public faith to the support of the foregoing declaration. We 
solemnly declare that they are entitled to our commiseration and 
protection, as the first owners of the soil, as an unfortunate race 
of people, that we wish to hold as friends and treat with justice.®^ 

On December 22, 1 835, the Council, as we have seen, acting upon 
the recommendation of Governor Henry Smith, appointed Sam 
Houston, John Forbes, and John Cameron commissioners to treat 
with the Indians under the instructions to be drawn up by the 
governor, which was done on the 30th. The commissioners were 
to proceed to Nacogdoches as soon as possible and enter upon the 
discharge of their duties, in which they were in nowise to transcend 
the instructions of the Declaration of the Consultation. "You will 
in all things pursue a course of justice and equity towards the In- 
dians,'" Governor Smith said, 

and protect all honest claims of the Whites, agreeably to such Laws 
compacts or treaties, as the said Indians may have heretofore made 
with the ]\[exican Eepublic. 

You will provide in said treaty with the Indians, that they shall 
never alienate their Lands, either separately or collectively, except 
to the Government of Texas, and to agree that the said Govern- 
ment, will at any time hereafter purchase all their claims at a fair 
and reasonable valuation. You will endeavor, if possible, to secure 
their effective co-operation at all times when it may be necessary to 
call the effective forces of Texas into the field and agreeing for their 
services in a body for a specific time. If found expedient and con- 
sistent, you are authorized and empowered to exchange other Lands 

"^Journal of the Consultation, 51-52. 



Frontier Defence 89 

within the limits of Texas not otherwise appropriated in the room 
of the Lands claimed hy Said Indians and as soon as practicable, 
, you will report your proceedings to the Governor and Council for 
their ratification and approval."* 

On February 23, 1830, the commissioners entered into a treaty 
with the Cherokees. By this treaty the Indians were to receive 
title to the land they claimed, and which under the declaration of 
the Consultation was adjudged to be theirs. The rights of those 
who settled before the Cherokees were to be respected, but all who 
had been once removed and had later returned were to be con- 
sidered intruders. All bands or tribes mentioned in the treaty 
were to be required to remove within the boundary fixed. The lands 
were not to be sold or alienated to anyone except the government 
of Texas, and the Cherokees agreed that no other tribes should be 
allowed to settle there. No individual Indian was permitted to sell 
land, and no Texan to buy from an Indian. The Indians were to 
be governed bv their own laws. The government of Texas had 
power to regulate trade and intercourse between the Indians and 
others, but should levy no tax on the trade of the Indians. Prop- 
erty stolen from citizens or from the Indians was to be restored to 
the persons from whom stolen, and the offender or offenders were 
to be punished by the tribe to which he or they belonged.** 

A ratification of this treaty would have resulted in the establish- 
ment of a separate Indian state with practical independence. It 
would have been a nation living within definitely fixed boundaries, 
under their own laws, punishing their own citizens for theft of 
horses from the whites, exempt from taxation by the Texan gov- 
ernment, and under no more restriction than would be involved in 
a control over foreign affairs and the appointment by Texas of an 
agent to live among the Indians. The Convention which met in 
iVIarch, however, refused to ratify the treaty, though Houston and 
the Indians considered the government morally bound to do so. 

Acting upon the theory that the declaration of the Consultation 
v/as sufficient authority for his action in drawing up the treaty 
with the Indians, Houston, while he was attempting to secure a 
ratification of the treaty by the Senate of the Republic after he 
became President, deliberately gave the Indians to understand that 
ratification was not necessary, and that they would get their lands. 

"MS. Indian Affairs, 1831-1841. Texas State Library. 
"'^Secret Journals, 35, 36, 37, 38. 



90 Miraheau Buonaparte Lamar 

Writing to Bowl od April 13, 183(5, durino- the retreat from Gon- 
zales, and after the refusal of the Convention to ratify the treaty, 
Houston said: 

My friend Col Bowl. 

I am busy, and will only say, how da do, to you ! You will get 
your land as it was promised in our Treaty, and you, and all my 
Eed brothers, may rest satisfied that I will always hold you by 
the hand, and look at you as Brothers and treat you as such ! 

You must give my best compliments to my sister, and tell her 
that I have not wore out the mockasins which she made me; and 
1 hope to see her and you, and all my relations, before they are 
wore out. Our army are all well, and in good spirits. In a little 
fight the other day several of the ]\Iexicans were killed, and none of 
OTir men hurt. There are not many of the enemy now in the 
Country, and one of our ships took one of the enemy's and took 
300 Barrels of flour, 250 Kegs of powder, and much property — 
and sunk a big warship of the enemy, which had many Guns.^® 

The purpose of this letter was probably to keep the Indians quiet 
by promising them their lands under the treaty and by making 
it appear that the Mexicans were making only a slight effort to 
subdue the Texans. In December, however, when there was no 
danger of the return of the Mexicans, he sent a message to the 
Senate urging its ratification. "You will find upon examining this 
treaty," he said, 

that it is just and equitable, and perhaps the best which could 
be made at the present time. It only secures to the said Indians 
the usufructuary right to the country included within the boundary 
described in the treaty, and does not part with the right of soil, 
which is in this Government; neither are the rights of any citizen 
ctf the Republic impaired by the views of the treaty, but are all care- 
fully secured by the third article of the same. In considering 
this treaty, you will doubtless bear in mind the very great necessity 
of conciliating the different tribes of Indians who inhabit portions 
of country almost in the center of our settlements as well as those 
who extend along our frontier."^ 

The Senate took no action at that time ; but at the next session 
appointed a committee to consider the treaty and the general In- 
dian question, and this committee reported on October 12, 1837. 
It declared the opinion that the rights with which Indians might 
liave been invested by the Mexican government previous to the 

''Lamar Papers, No. 352. 
"Secret Journals, 35. 



Frontier Defence 91 

declaration of independence should be respected, but was not able 
to find that any such right had been acquired. The premises as- 
sumed by the Consultation were false, and acknowledged rights 
based on false premises "are of no effect and void, which your 
committee conceive to be the case in this instance." The territory 
mentioned in the treaty formed part of the grant to David G. 
Burnet for the purpose of colonization, the colony was filled, or 
nearly so, prior to the declaration of the Consultation, and the com- 
mittee was satisfied that the grant of the territory to Burnet for 
colonization many years after the settlement of the Indians on 
the soil, was sufficient evidence that no obligation was created 
which could be considered binding in favor of the Cherokees, or 
any other Indians. Finally, the committee reported the following 
resolution : 

Eesolved by the Senate of the Eepublic of Texas that they dis- 
approve and utterly refuse to ratify the Treaty or any artickles 
thereof concluded by Sam Houston and Jno. Forbes on the 33rd 
day of February, 1836, between the provisional Gov[emmen]t of 
Texas of the one part, and the "Head Chiefs" Head men and war- 
riors of the Cherokees on the other part. Inasmuch as that said 
treaty was based on premises that did not exist and that the oper- 
ation of it would not only be detrimental to the interests of the 
Eepublic but would also be a violation of the vested right of many 
citizens, . . , 

Eesolved that the President of this Eepublic be authorized and 
advised to appoint commissioners and furnish them with instruc- 
tions such as he may deem most expedient to bring about friendly 
relations between the Comanches and this Eepublic ; Provided that 
no fee simple right of soil be acknowledged by this Govfernmenlt in 
favor of those Indians."" 

On December IG a resolution was adopted declaring null and 
void the treaty with the Cherokees, and no further attempt was 
made by Houston to secure ratification.*"* 

There was considerable unrest among the Indians in the East in 
the summer of 1838 at the time of the Cordova rebellion. There 
is an indication from the diary of Miracle referred to above that 
Bowl had foreknowledge of the plans of the Mexicans. He man- 
aged to hide his laiowledge, however, and received assurances from 
Houston that the treaty was being observed by the Texans, and 

"^Secret Journals, 75-79. 
'"Ibid., 100. 



92 Miraheau Buonaparte Lamar 

calling upon him to keep the treaty. Houston promised the im- 
mediate appointment of some one to run the boundary line between 
the white and Indian possessions, and on August 16, sent Bowl 
another letter promising that the white warriors would not hurt 
the Indians.^" On August 18, after the dispersal of the rebels, 
Houston issued an order for mustering out the army, in which he 
urged the soldiers in falling back to respect the Indians and their 
property, avoiding injury to every species of property.'^^ 

The promises of Houston that the treaty would be observed and 
the boundary line run kept the Cherokees from taking active part 
with the Mexicans. Later, in the month of August, Eusk asked 
Bowl to influence the Shawnees, Kickapoos, Delawares, Kaosatis, 
and other friendly tribes to keep the peace. After the battle with 
the Kickapoos on October 16, Eusk complained to Bowl that a 
Cherokee had been found among the dead Kickapoos, which Bowl 
explained by saying he was a renegade Indian."^ 

In the latter part of the summer of 1838 Houston appointed 
Alexander Horton to run the line between the Indian territory and 
that of the whites. On account of the opposition of the whites, 
and the quarrels among Horton's men, nothing was accomplished 
before the end of Houston's administration. A letter from Bowl 
to Horton on October 27, is interesting and enlightening as re- 
gards the relations of the whites and Indians at that time. He 
wrote :" 

Mr Horton Dear Sir I have accomplished my Desir in rasing 
my men for to guard and aid you while you are running the Line 
in so much T understand that some of the white people are against 
it which I am sorry to hear that, for we wish to do write ourselves, 
and we hoped that white people wanted to do the same as for 
your disputes among yourselves I have ordered my men to have 
nothing to do with it. My express orders is to my men is to guard 
you and your property from the enemy I hope that you will be 
particular with us in consequence of us not understanding your 
ton.gue and also we will pay that respect to you I hope you will 
let us know when you need us and where and I will be at your 
service I will detain Gayen till I get a line from you so as he 
may read our writing I have twenty-five volunteers to send to 
you so nothing more only your Friend Bole. 

"Originals in Lamar Papers, Nos. 781, 782, 783, 784, 785, 786. 

"/5id., 792. 

"""Lamar Papers, Nos. 801, 839. 

'"Lamar Papers, No. 855. 



Frontier Defence 93 

Early in December, just before his inauguration as President, 
Lamar received a long letter from Archibald Hotchkiss of Nacog- 
doches. It cannot be shown to have influenced Lamar in deter- 
mining his course toward the Cherokees, but it was not calculated 
to change his belief that they had no real right to the soil which 
they occupied. After tracing in a general way the history of the 
Cherokees in Texas, Hotchkiss said: 

In the year 1833 I became the agent of Burnet for the purpose 
of carrying out the terms set forth in his contract; to wit: to settle 
the land ... a short time subsequent to my receiving this it 
became necessary for me to repair to the seat of Government for 
the purpose of transacting business for my [principal,] the prin- 
ciple object of which was to induce them to remove the Indians 
who had settled within [the bounds J of our grant, and by so doing 
had to a very great extent impeded the settling of the lands. [I 
received] assurances from the Government that they [would be 
removed] immediately; but that promise was not realized [on ac- 
count] of the increased internal difficulties of the country. 

In the early part of 1835 I entered into a correspondence with 
the Gov[ernmen]t of the State of Coahuila and Texas upon the 
subject of removing the Indians representing the extreme difficulty 
we had in obtaining colonists, who were willing to settle in the 
vicinity of such dangerous neighbors as the Cherokees had allways 
proved themselves to be in the United States; In answer to which 
the Governor informed me that he was very sensible of the diffi- 
culties under which I was laboring, but that the finances of the 
State were at such a state of exhaustion that it was extremely 
doubtful whether they would be able to do anything until the en- 
sueing year, whereupon I offered upon behalf of my principals to 
advance the means necessary- for removing if the Government would 
afford its countenance and authority for the undertaking, and the 
corresponding order was sent to the political chief of Nacogdoches 
for their removal forthwith sometime in the Spring of 1835 which 
order was never executed but suppressed at the instigation of de- 
signing men, the war of Independence which succeeded shortly 
after put an end to all further action upon this subject.'* . . . 

Lamar's message of December 21, 1838, with regard to the In- 
dian, has been mentioned. Further notice at this point is neces- 
sary for an explanation of the attitude he assumed concerning the 
rights of the Cherokees to the lands they occupied. He said that 
the immigrant tribes had no legal or equitable claim to any por- 
tion of the territory of Texas; that their immigration to Texas 

"Hotchkiss to Lamar, December 5, 1838, Lamar Papers, No. 905. 



94 Miraheau Buonaparte Lamar 

had been unsolicited and unauthorized, and had always been a 
source of regret to the more enlightened population ; that the Fed- 
eral Government of Mexico neither conceded nor promised them 
lands or civil rights; that they came as intruders, and were posi- 
tively forbidden to make any permanent abidance, and had con- 
tinued in the country up to that time against the public wish and 
at the sacrifice of public tranquility. The offer made to bordering 
tribes in the colonization law of Coahuila and Texas contained 
precedent conditions which had in no wise been carried out. The 
pledge of the Consultation and the treaty drawn up under it had 
never been ratified, and, if it had been, the Indians had violated it 
time and again.'^"' 

In the latter part of 1838 and early part of 1839 the Indians 
in the West were active, and the government made preparations 
to punish them. To keep the Indians in the East quiet, Lamar 
appointed Martin Lacy agent to the Cherokees, Shawnees, and 
other tribes. The special object of the appointment, said the in- 
structions, was to cultivate and preserve the friendly relations exist- 
ing between the frontier inhabitants of Texas and the "Cherokees, 
Shawnees, etc., which have emigrated from the United States to 
Texas, but whose claim to territory or even its occupancy has not 
yet been recognized, and is now a subject of grave deliberation on 
the part of the Texian Government." The Cherokees could not 
better evince their friendly intentions, he suggested, than by pro- 
hibiting intercourse with the hostile Indians.'^^ 

On March 10, 1839, the Texan minister in Washington informed 
the government of the United States that the President of Texas 
was determined to act with great energy towards those Indians of 
the East who had been consistently hostile, and suggested that the 
United States take steps to restrain their Indians from assisting 
the kindred tribes in Texas. Before entering on a general war, 
however. Bowl, chief of the Cherokees, was allowed to visit the 
various chiefs and attempt to bring about an adjustment of the 
differences with them. Bowl reported that there Avas a sincere 

''^Lamar Papers, No. .361 ; Telegraph and Texas Register, December 26, 
1838. 

'"Lamar to Martin Lacy. February 14, 1839, Indian Affairs, ISSJ-fS-'fl. 
Texas State Library. 



Frontier Defence 95 

desire on the part of the Indians to resume peaceful rehxtions with 
the TexansJ^ 

This change in the attitude of the Indians was probably pro- 
duced by the destruction of the party of Cordova, March 26, 1839. 
Cordova had been active in the rebellion at Nacogdoches in 1838, 
and was at the time of his defeat by Burleson probably on his way 
to ]\Iatamoras to get supplies for another outbreak similar to that 
of 1838. On IMarch 26, 1839, he was discovered with a party of 
sixty or seventy Mexicans, Indians, and negroes, encamped at the 
foot of the Colorado iMountains. Colonel Burleson collected eighty 
men and started on his trail, overtaking him on the Guadalupe, 
where a battle was fought resulting in the defeat of the Cordova 
party with the loss of about thirty men. Cordova himself escaped,, 
but this ended his efforts to stir up revolution in Texas." ^ 

Albert Sidney Johnston, Secretary of War, writing to Bowl on 
April 10, referred to this action, and said that the recent develop- 
ments went to show incontestably that the Cherokees, or a part of 
them, the Delaware?, Shawnees, Kickapoos, Caddoes, Wacoes, 
"'Tewankanees," Bedies, and Kechies, about the time he was with 
them had entered into a compact with Cordova to carry on the 
war as soon as ho should return from Matamoras. The assertion 
that Cordova had been driven off when he attempted to agitate a 
revolt, he said, was probably to gain time and to conceal the object 
of the journey to Matamoras. 

The President grants peace to them but is not deceived. They 
will be permitted to cultivate undisturbed as long as they manifest 
by their forbearance from all aggressive acts and their friendly 
conduct the sincerity of their professions or until Congress shall 
adopt such measures in reference to them as in their wisdom they 
may deem proper. With a clear view of all matters connected 
with their feeling and interests It should not surprise the Chero- 
kees to learn that such measures are in progress under the orders 
of the President as will render abortive any attempt to again dis- 
turb the quiet of the frontier nor need it be any cause of alarm 
to those who intend to act in good faith. All intercourse between 
the friendly indians & those at war with Texas must cease. The 
President directs that you will cause the contents of this commu- 
nication to be made known to all the chiefs who were present at 
the council.'^® 

"Thirty-second Cong.. 2nd. sess.. Senate Documents. No. 14. p. 20. A. S. 
Johnston to Bowl, April 10, 1839, Lamar Papers, No. 1188. 
"Yoakum, History of Texas. II, 261. 
"A. S. Johnston to Bowl. April 10. 1839, Lamar Papers, No. 1188. 



96 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 

Some time in April or early in May jMaJor B. C. Waters was 
ordered to construct a military station on the Great Saline, which 
was in territory claimed by the Cherokees. Bowl mobilized his 
warriors and ordered Waters to leave, which he did, since he was 
not supported by a military force of his own large enough to re- 
sist the Indians. This naturally aroused the whites, particularly 
of the East. The San Augustine Red Lander called on the citizens 
to respond to the call of JMajor Waters for aid in carrying out the 
orders of the Secretary of War.^*' The Telegraph and Texas Reg- 
ister stated that there Avere constant complaints of Indian aggres- 
sions; that the Cherokees had been a source of trouble since 1836, 
and that they could not be tolerated longer in Texas.*^ 

The action of Bowl called forth a stern letter from Lamar. He 
had learned with surprise, he said, that Bowl had compelled Major 
Waters to leave his post on the Great Saline. That oiScer was 
acting under the authority and orders of the government, and any 
attempt to interfere with him or to impede the execution of his 
duty (!ould be regarded in no other light than as an outrage upon 
the sovereignty of Texas. "You assume to be acting under a 
Treaty negotiated ut your \'illage on the twenty-third day of Feb- 
ruary 183H with commissioners appointed by the Provisional Gov- 
ernment of Texas." No doubt there were those who would im- 
press him with the belief that by virtue of that treaty the Chero- 
kees had a right to maintain within the limits of the Eepublic an 
independent government bearing no responsibility to the whites as 
though they were a foreign nation. But the Texans had acquired 
their sovereignty by many rightful and glorious achievements, and 
would exercise it without division or community with other people. 
The Indians could never be pennitted to exercise a sovereignty 
which would conflict with the rights of the Texans. He charged 
that Bowl was at the center of all conspiracies, and concluded with 
this ultimatum : 

I therefore feel it my duty as the Chief Magistrate of this He- 
public to tell you in plain languacre of sincerity, that the Cherokees 
will never be permitted to establish a permanent and independent 
Jurisdiction in the limits of this government — that the political 
and fee simple claims which they set up to our territory now ocv';u- 
pied by them will never be allowed — and that they are permitted 

'"Quoted in Telef/raph and Texas Register, June 19, 18,10. 
^'^Telegraph and Texas Register, June 19, 1839. 



Frontier Defence 97 

at present to remain where they are only because this government 
is looking forward to the time when some peaceable arrangement 
can be made for their removal without the necessity of sheddmg 
blood; but that their final removal is contemplated is certain and 
Hiat it will be effected is equally so. Whether it will be done by 
friendly negotiating, or by the violence of war, must depend on 
the Cherokes themselves.®^ 

Shortly before this, May 14, 1839, Manuel Flores, who had been 
active the year before in the Cordova rebellion, with a party of 
twenty-five marauders committed some murders between Seguin 
and Bexar. They were pursued by several Texans under Lieuten- 
ant James 0. Eice, and were overtaken on the San Gabriel fifteen 
miles from Austin. In the battle which followed Flores and two 
others were killed and the others put to flight. On the body of 
Flores were found papers which convinced Lamar and his cabinet 
that the Cherokees were again in treasonable correspondence with 
the Mexicans. These documents were sent to the Secretary of "War 
by Colonel Burleson on May 22, reaching him about the time of 
Lamar's letter to Bowl."*^ 

These papers consisted of letters addressed to Manuel Flores, 
Vicente Cordova, and to the friendly tribes of Texas, by the com- 
mandant general for the Eastern Interior States, Canalizo, who 
had succeeded Filisola. The letter to Flores, February 27, 1839, 
stated that it was impossible for the Federal Government to take 
any steps for the recovery of Texas on account of the war with 
France. It was possible, however, he said, that the Indians and 
loyal Mexicans could defend their homes by joining together against 
the Americans. Tliey ought not to depend on flying invasions, but 
on operations of a more continuous character, causing perpetual 
alarm and inquietude to the enemy. To obtain these objects it 
was necessary "to bum their habitations, to lay waste their fields, 
and to prevent them from assembling in great numbers, by rapid 
and well-concerted movements, so as to draw their attention in 
every direction, and not offer to them any determinate object at 
which to strike." 

Another letter was addressed by Canalizo to tlie chiefs of the 
tribes. As it was the principal basis for the claim tliat the Chero- 

'=Lamar to Bowl, May 26, 1839. Indian Affairs, ISSl-lS'fl, Toxas State 
Library. 

"Yoakum, History of Texas, II, 259. 



98 Mirabenu Buonnpnrte Lamar 

kees and other tribes were plotting with the Mexicans for the ex- 
termination of the whites, it is g-iven in full: 

Don Manuel Flores, and the chiefs of the friendly tribes accom- 
panying him, will make kiiowu to you my sentiments towards your- 
self and my friends, the Indians of your tribe; and also what you 
have to expect as regards your remaining in quiet possession of the 
land selected by you within the Mexican territoiy for settlement. 
And these individuals are informed in relation to what has to be 
done. 

Have an understanding with said Flores in order that you may 
act in such a manner as to be secured in the peaceable possession 
of your lands, and to prevent any adventurer again destroying the 
repose of your families, or again treading the soil where repose the 
bones of your forefathers, and be careful not to deviate from his 
instructions. 

Act under the full assurance of our generosity, of which we have 
given so many proofs, and that nothing can be expected of the 
greedy adventurers for land, who wish to deprive you even of the 
sun which warms and vi\afies you, and who will not cease to envy 
you while the grass grows and the water flows.^* 

This letter was addressed to Captain Ignacio of the Guapanagues ; 
Captain Coloxe of the Caddoes; The Chief of the Seminoles; Big 
Mush, civil chief of the Cherokees; Captain Benito of the Kicka- 
poos; Fama Sargento de los Brazos; Lieutenant-Colonel Bowl of 
the Cherokees. 

On receipt of these papers Lamar decided to arrange for the 
immediate removal of the Cherokees from Texas, and sent the Vice- 
President, David G. Burnet, and the Secretary of "War, A. S. John- 
ston, to negotiate with them. The commissioners were to offer to 
buy their produce and pay for their removal to the United States. 
At the same time he announced in a letter to the Shawnees the 
intention to expel the Cherokees, in a friendly manner if possible, 
but by force if they resisted, and warned the Shawnees to have 
nothing to do with the Cherokees or the Mexicans.^"^ 

The commissioners reached the Cherokee village about the first 
of July and entered into negotiations with Bowl and Big Mush. 
Bowl acknowledged that they were intruders and had no legal 

'*This correspondence was sent by the Texas State Department to the 
Texan minister at Washington, and presented by him to the American 
Secretary of State, June 29, 1839. It is published in 32 Congress, 2d 
session, Senate Doc^iment, No. 14, pp. 29-35. 

^''Lamar to Linnee and other chiefs and headmen of the Shawnees, June 
3, 1839, Lamar Papers, No. 1321. 



Frontier Defence 99 

rights to the soil they occupied. He agreed to return to Arkansas 
in return for payment for their improvements and transportation, 
but he delayed on one pretext after another putting his agreement 
in the fonn of a treaty, using the delay, it was supposed, to get- 
his forces together preparatory to resist the Texans. Even up to 
the morning of July 15, Bowl assured Adjutant General McLeod 
that he was willing to abide by his agreement, but again asked for 
delay in signing the treaty. The Texan forces had assembled by 
that time, and wearying of the procrastination of the Cherokee 
chief, orders were given for the battle. 

The council-ground was about five miles below the Indian camp. 
When the Texans arrived at the camp they found that the Indians 
had mobilized seven miles above. When the Texans approached 
their rendezvous they were fired on by the Indians, upon which 
the Texans attacked and drove the Indians from their position, 
killing a number. The next day they followed their retreating 
enemies, and in another battle completely defeated them, killing 
almost a hundred, among the dead being Bowl. The Indians con- 
tinued their flight, pursued by the Texans, until the 25th, when the 
pursuit was given up. The main body of Cherokees reached their 
friends in Arkansas, and save for occasional marauding parties the 
Texans were free of them as neighbors permanently.*® 

The Shawnees, to whom Lamar had sent a warning on June 3, 
decided to accept the offer of the Texan government to pay their 
transportation and to pay for all improvements, consequently the 
commissioners were able to sign a treaty with them, and they left 
peaceably for the United States.^' The Coshattoes and Alabamas, 
who had accepted the proposal of the Congress of Coahuila and 
Texas in 1835, were removed to other lands in the Eepublic. 

In his message to Congress on November 12, 1839, Lamar re- 
viewed the whole Cherokee question up to their removal from Texas. 
He gave as his reasons for expelling them from Texas: (1) that 
they were immigrant tribes, asserting political rights; (2) that 
they were a most enlightened and most wily foe, and through their 
superior intelligence were able to control the wild Indians; (3) 
that they had committed atrocities on the inhabitants of Texas; 

'"Report to Secretary of War. Telegraph and Texas Register, July 24 
and August 14, 1839:' Yoakum. History of Texas, II, 270. 

"Indian Affairs, 1831-lS',r, Texas State Library. Lamar's message 
to Congress. November 12, 1839, Telegraph and Texas Register, Novem- 
ber 27, 1839. 



100 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 

and (4) that they had been in collusion with the Mexicans. He 
reviewed the efforts of commissioners to secure their friendly re- 
moval by agreeing to pay for the transportation of the women and 
children and for all improvements, but said that in the face of these 
offers they flew to arms. And finally he expressed it as Ms opinion 
that the proper course to pursue with all the barbarian race was 
expulsion or extermination.*'^ 

The expulsion of the Cherokees was naturally not accomplished 
without serious criticism of Lamar, and an earnest defense by his 
contemporaries ; and some historians have seen fit to claim that the 
action of Lamar was unjustified. It is perhaps not worth while 
to enter into the discussion of this question. The history of Texas 
in relation to the Indians is too similar to that of Georgia and 
other American States to require justification here. Lamar's in- 
stincts and training naturally led him to sympathize with the set- 
tlers as against the Indians. He was secretary to Governor Troup 
of Georgia while that State was attempting to extend her jurisdic- 
tion over the territory of the Creeks in response to a demand 
of the would-be settlers. And it may have been that he was too 
ready to listen to tales of conspiracies between the Mexicans and 
Indians. But sufficient evidence has been presented to prove that 
the Cherokees did not have any vested rights in the soil they occu- 
pied. The Mexican government might have been culpable for 
promising lands and then not giving them, but the Indians cer- 
tainly understood that they had not secured title to the lands. The 
government of the Eepublic might have been culpable for using 
the promise of lands in return for a guarantee of neutrality dur- 
ing the War of Independence, but again the Indians knew that they 
had not secured title to the lands under the Eepublic. 

The charge that the Cherokees were engaged in a conspiracy 
with the Mexicans is not important in this connection. The im- 
portant question is as to whether or not sufficient evidence was pre- 
sented to Lamar to justify his believing that they were so engaged. 
And this seems to be answered in the affirmative. The papers 
taken from the body of Miracle had shown him in consultation 
with Bowl before the Cordova rebellion in 1838, and Bowl must 
have known beforehand of the proposed rebellion. The papers 
addressed by Canalizo to the Indian chiefs, including Bowl and Big 
Mush, while not proving any connection of the Cherokees with the 

'^"Telegraph and Texas Register, November 27, 1839. 



Frontier Defence 101 

proposed war, could be taken by Lamar in the light of the earlier 
documents as at least indicatinof some connection, especially as 
they came at a time when Bowl was ordering the military agent 
of the government out of his territory and mobilizing his warriors 
to prevent the building of a fort. 

The whole problem comes back to whether or not the Indians 
should have been permitted to establish in Texas a government of 
their own, independent of the Texan government. A ratification 
of the treaty drawn up on February 23, 1836, under the Provisional 
Government would have guaranteed the perpetuation of such a 
government. It was inevitable that the whites should encroach 
on the Indians, and it was unlikelv that a white population would 
have tolerated an independent Indian state within their borders. 
Lamar, therefore, acted legally and Justly, and what is perhaps 
more important, logically, in forcing the withdrawal of the Cher- 
okee Indians from Texas. 

This story ends with the passage on February 1, 1840, of an act 
for sectionizing and selling the lands which had been occupied 
by the Cherokees.^" The act made no provision for the settlers 
who had come into the territory since 1823, and because of this and 
the desire of many to locate claims in that region, there was bitter 
opposition to the passage of the bill. Houston, who was now a 
member of Congress, led the advocates of the bill, while the oppo- 
sition was led by David S. Kaufman, Speaker of the House. The 
advocates of the measure claimed that the Cherokee lands did not 
come under the general land act, as they had been won from the 
Indians only in the preceding July, and that they actually belonfired 
to the government for disposal as it saw fit. The opponents of the 
measure claimed that the lands had always belonged to the Ee- 
public, hence they should come under the terms of the general land 
act and be disposed of as other lands of the Eepublic. The argu- 
ment that the sale of the lands would bring much needed revenue 
into the treasury overcame the objections of many who held that 
the Indians had no legal right to the land or of occupancy, and the 
measure became a law. 

"Gammel, Laws of Texas, II, 358. 



103 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 

Chapter V 

THE SANTA FE EXPEDITION 

Perhaps of all the things undertaken or accomplished by Lamar, 
the project of sending a mercantile expedition to Santa Fe ac- 
companied by a military aid has caused most adverse criticism. 
Most historians have followed contemporaries, particularly Hous- 
ton, and near contemporaries, as Yoakum, and are content to 
refer to Lamar's scheme as visionary. As it was one of the poli- 
cies that gripped him throughout his whole administration, and 
as its failure has led to so much criticism, a full examination of 
his purposes in sending such an expedition, and the obstacles con- 
fronted by those who undertook it, is necessary. 

It should be understood, in the beginning, that Texas claimed, 
whether rightly or wrongly, all the territory to the east of the 
Rio Grande, and Santa Fe was about twelve miles east of that 
river in New Mexico. Shortly after the constitutional govern- 
ment was established in October, 1836, Stephen F. Austin, Texan 
Secretary of State, in his instructions to William H. Wharton, 
the envoy to the United States, said that as regarded boundary, 
the question could not be settled at that time, but that Wharton 
might explain to the Government of the United States that Texas 
claimed possession to the Rio Grande. He traced the boundary 
as follows : Beginning at the mouth of said river on the Gulf of 
Mexico, thence up the middle of the river, following its main 
channel, including the islands, to its most northerly source, then 
in a straight line to the United States boundary, and along that 
boundary to the starting point.^ 

The First Congress took early action in proclaiming the bound- 
aries of the new republic, and on December 19, 1836, the Presi- 
dent approved an act providing that the civil and political Juris- 
diction of Texas should extend to include the boundaries as 
Austin had outlined them to Wharton. At the same time the Presi- 
dent was directed to open negotiations with the United States to 
ascertain and determine the boundary between those two eoun- 

'Garrison, Diplomatic Correspondence of the Repuilic of Texas, I, 132. 
American Historical Association Report, 1907, II. 



The Santa Fe Expedition 103 

tries.^ And from that time on the Eio Grande to its source was 
officially considered as the western boundary of Texas. 

Just when Lamar conceived the idea of establishing the author- 
ity of Texas over the territory included in this claim, it is not 
possible to say; nor can we determine positively what motive 
chiefly influenced him in adopting the policy which he ultimately 
carried out. It is likely that he began his administration as 
President with some idea of taking possession of the Santa Fe 
country, though it was not until the last year of his administration 
that he was able actually to undertake the measure. There is no 
doubt that he desired to establish control, partly because he was 
convinced that the people of New Mexico desired to live under 
Texan sovereignty, and partly because he wished to create a nation 
reaching ultimately to the Pacific; but chiefly because he under- 
stood the commercial benefits that would accrue to Texas through 
a diversion of the trade between St. Louis and Santa Fe to the 
ports of Texas. 

The importance of this trade to Texas was early recognized. On 
August 27, 1829, Stephen P. Austin wrote to Henry Austin, stat- 
ing that he contemplated opening a road to El Paso and to Santa 
Fe with a view to diverting the Missouri trade to Galveston.^ 
Later, in 1835, Austin recommended to the Mexican government 
that two companies of riflemen be stationed on the Colorado and 
Brazos rivers for the purpose of defense and for opening a road 
to Chihua,hua.* One cannot say whether these suggestions in- 
fluenced Lamar, but he was acquainted with them, and, as will 
appear, he adopted a policy in keeping with the ideas of Austin. 

At the same time that the commerce with Santa Fe was becoming 
attractive to the Texans, it seemed that the people of New Mexico 
were about to throw off their yoke of allegiance to the Mexican 
government, and there was reason to suppose that Texan rule 
would not be objectionable. In 1835, when a strong central gov- 
ernment was established in Mexico, resulting in the secession of 
Texas from the Mexican government. Colonel Albino Perez was 
sent to take charge of the province of New Mexico. The people 
up to that time liad been ruled by native governors and resented 

=Gammel, Laios of Texas, I, 1193-1194. 

"Austin Papers, file of July, 1836. University of Texas. 

'Stephen F. Austin to James F. Perry, March 4, 1835, in ibid. 



104: Miraheau Buonaparte Lamar 

the appointment of a stranger as governor. The new governor 
introduced a system of direct taxation which proved unsatisfactory, 
but the populace took no active steps in opposition until a native 
alcalde was imprisoned by the Prefecto of the northern district. 
The alcalde was released by a mob, upon which the governor called 
out the militia to put down the mob. It developed that the 
militia were in sympathy with the mob, however, and, only a few 
adhering to the governor, he was easily taken by the mob and 
put to death. The mob proceeded to elect a governor of their 
own, and managed to hold out as an independent government 
until put down by Armijo in January, 1838.^ 

The Texan authorities knew of the rebellion, but they were not 
aware that it had been put down. On January 5, 1838, the sec- 
retary of state wrote the Texan minister in London, as follows : 

The Californias continue independent of Mexico, and recently 
a rebellion in Santa Fe resulted in the death of the Governor and 
a number of the principal olificers of the Government, and the 
appointment on the part of the revolutionists, of commissioners 
to apply to the U. States for admission: not knowing, I suppose, 
that they are included within the limits claimed by Texas.*^ 

Shortly after the inauguration of Lamar an act was passed for 
the creation of a regiment of regular soldiers for warfare against 
tlie Indians.'^ Colonel Edward Burleson, with a full staff of sub- 
ordinate officers, was stationed at Bastrop, an outlying settlement 
on the Colorado. On January 14, 1839, an act was passed for 
the permanent location of the seat of government, and this loca- 
tion was to be limited to some point between the Trinity and the 
Colorado, north of the San Antonio Road.^ The connection be- 
tween these two acts will appear presently. 

Among the officers under the above act, William Jefferson Jones 
was appointed as a lieutenant. He had taken part in the cam- 
paigns against the Indians in the East in the summer of 1838. 
He was in Houston in December, 1838, or January, 1839, and 
it appears that he was the first to outline a program for taking 

"Josiah Gregg, Commerce of the Prairies, T, 130-136. 

"Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., Til, 838. The secretary of state was wrong 
in saying that application for annexation to the United States was con- 
sidered. 

'Gammel, Laws of Texas, II, 15. 

*Ibid., II, 163. 



The Santa Fe Expedition 105 

possession of the Santa Fe country. He had a conversation with 
Lamar on the subject, but whether he initiated the proposal, there 
is no present M^ay of knowing. The only record of the conversa- 
tion is contained in a letter from Jones to Lamar a short time 
later, and this would indicate that the originator of the scheme 
was Jones. It is necessary to quote at length from this letter in 
order to make clear the connection of Jones with the enterprise. 

Genl M. B. Lamar. Bastrop Feby 8th, 1839, 

My dear Sir, 

In a letter, which I addressed to the Secretary at War a few 
days since relative to the contemplated expedition against the 
Comanches, I took occasion to refer to the importance of the Santa 
Fe trade and of the facilities of diverting it to the Colorado Val- 
ley, the natural outlet for all commerce of the North Western 
Territory of Texas, at this moment the most productive portion 
of it. The lowest estimate of the trade of what was formerly 
New Mexico has been placed at $20,000,000 (millions), consisting 
of gold & silver and the rich furs of the momitams, which now 
pass out by the Red River valley and the Rio Grande, building 
up the towns of St. Louis and Matamoras. . . . 

Whilst in the City of IIoui=ton and at the time of my appoint- 
ment to the Regiment against the Comanches, I suggested to you 
the importance of a politico-military mission to Santa Fe with a 
view to the introduction of the trade of New Mexico thro' the 
natural outlet within the limits of this Republic. 

. . . I have every reason to believe the seat of government 
will be located on the Colorado between this place and the moun- 
tains, probably at their foot and I have no doubt, the selection 
will be the most judicious wliieh can be made within the limits 
assigned the Commissioners by the law. In that event the Cap- 
ital of the Nation may command the entire trade of New Mex- 
ico. . . . With a view to the immediate diversion of this trade 
to the Colorado I would suggest the early establishment of a 
trading house at the highest point on the river knowoi to be 
navigable, say at the junction of the Pasigona & Colorado, with 
a small force to protect it. [He went so far as to suggest con- 
ciliation with the Prairie Indians, who were the most troublesome 
of the Indian neighbors, and continued,] 

As the government of Texas claims to extend its territory to 
the utmost limits of Santa Fe, it is desirable that the people 
should be brought under our direct political control. The great 
distance of Santa Fe from the government of Mexico has left that 
territory entirely dependent upon itself for protection, and the 
people only feel the authority of the political power thro the 



106 Miraheau Buonaparte Lamar 

weight of taxation imposed by the central head. They are pre- 
pared to unite with us, and this is the favorahle moment to 
cement the friendship they have offered. The revolutionary spirit 
is warm in New Mexico, and the people are determined to throw 
off the despotic yoke of the present government. We should at 
once demonstrate our sympathies with them. 

I hope, if possibly in your power, that you will order an im- 
mediate military escort for a company of traders to Santa Fe, 
and that a portion if not the entire adventure may be undertaken 
by the government itself. Immense profits must result from it. 
and the introduction of 75 or 100 thousand dollars of specie from 
Santa Fe thro' the Colorado Valley will give confidence to indi- 
vidual enterprize and the route vnW soon be lined with traders 
able to protect themselves, who will introduce the riches of New 
Mexico into the lap of Texas. . . .'' 

It is a striking fact that the five commissioners charged with the 
location of the permanent seat of government came to the con- 
clusion anticipated by Jones. I have found no direct connection 
between Jones and the commissioners, but it is unlikely that the 
harmony of his ideas with the report of the commissioners was 
accidehtal. Unfortunately there is no record of the instructions 
given to the commissioners by Lamar other than the statement of 
his secretary referred to above; hence, it is not possible to indi- 
cate how far the desirability of the point selected as a way station 
between Santa Fe and points on the Gulf was a part of the in- 
structions. The commissioners left while Jones was in Houston, 
or shortly after, and there seems no doubt that there was a gen- 
eral understanding among the commissioners and the President 
that a location was to be selected favorable to the proposed occu- 
pation of New Mexico. The report of the commissioners, among 
other things, stated: 

The Commissioners confidently anticipate the time when a great 
thoroughfare shall be established from Santa Fe to our Sea ports, 
and another from Red Eiver to Matamoras, which two routs must 
almost of necessity intersect each other at this point. They look 
forward to the time when this city shall be the emporium of not 

°W. J. Jones to Lamar, February 8, 1839, Lamar Papers, No. 1049. 

Tliis letter is endorsed by Lamar, "llios J Jones Bastrop 8th Feby 1839. 
Upon Santa Foe trade &c Received 20th Feby." This indicates a strange 
lack of knowledp^e of Jones' real name. The letter was antoijraphed, 
"Wm. Jeflferson Jones," but the first abbreviation is difficult of interpre- 
tation. Certainly Jones must have been little known by Tjamar previous 
to this, thoun;h he became bettor Icnown later. 



The Santa Fe Expedition 107 

only the productions of the rich soil of the San Saba, Puertenalis 
Hono and Pecan Bayo, but of all the Colorado and Brassos, as also 
the Produce of the rich mining country kno^oi to exist on those 
streams. They are satisfied that a truly National City could at 
no other point within the limits assigned them be reared up, not 
that no other sections of the Country are not equally fertile, but 
that no other combined so many and such varied advantages and 
beauties as the one in question. The imagination of even the 
romantic will not be disappointed on viewing the Valley of the 
Colorado, and the fertile and gracefully undulating woodlands 
and luxuriant Prairies at a distance from it. The most sceptical 
will not doubt its healthiness, and the citizens bosom must swell 
with honest pride when standing in the Portico of the Capitol 
of his Country he looks abroad upon a region worthy only of being 
the home of the brave and free. Standing on the juncture of the 
routs of Santa Fe and the Sea Coast, of Red River and Matamoras, 
looking with the same glance upon the green lomantic Mountains, 
and the fertile and widely extended plains of his country, can 
a feeling of Nationality fail to arise in his bosom or could the 
fire of patriotism lie dormant under such circumstances.^" 

For a while Lamar seriously considered the sending of an imme- 
diate military expedition to Santa Fe. This would have been 
justified on the grounds that Texas was still technically at war 
with Mexico, though no actual hostilities had occurred since the 
Mexican defeat at San Jacinto. In March, 1839, he addressed the 
Harrisburg Volunteers on the defence of the frontier, and con- 
gratulated them on their prospects for 'Tionorable station in the 
select Regiment which is to be placed under the command of 
Colonel Karnes in the anticipated expedition to Santa Fee."^^ 
Letters from correspondents also indicate that there was some ac- 
tivity looking toward such an expedition.^^ Lamar was unwilling, 
however, to adopt the suggestion of Jones that the Prairie Indians 
be conciliated, especially since he had repeatedly expressed himself 
as favoring their extermination or expulsion from the republic. 
And the warfare begun early in his administration continued 
until the close of 1840, leaving little opportunity to divert any of 
the forces for an expedition to Santa Fe. 

'"Report of Seat of Government Commissioners, April 13, 1839, MS. 
Seat of Govervment Papers, Texas State Library. 

"Lamar Papers, No. 1162. 

'=.T. S. Jones to Lamar, April 14. 1839. Lamar Papers, No. 1198; W. J. 
Jones to Lamar, April 15, 1839, Ibid., No. 1199. 



108 Miraheau Buonaparte Lamar 

It will be noticed that the letter of Jones mentioned a previous 
letter to the secretary of war on the subject of the Santa Fe trade, 
and the importance of securing it for Texas. It is interesting to 
notice that the secretary of war in his report, September 30, 1839, 
mentioned the fact that the government was constructing a mili- 
tary road from Red River to the presidio crossing of the Nueces 
river, and proposed the construction of a similar road from Austin 
to Santa Fe. He said that Santa Fe was situated about twelve 
miles east of the upper Rio Grande, and was included within the 
statutory limits of Texas. It was settled entirely by Mexicans, 
and never having been conquered by Texas was still under the 
Mexican government. The country between Austin and Santa Fe, 
he said, was wholly unoccupied save by roaming bodies of Indians. 
For many years the traders of the United States had carried on a 
successful commerce with Santa Fe, of the annual value of four 
or five million dollars. Santa Fe was not the consumer of all the 
goods, but was rather the depot for trade with the interior of 
Mexico, He thought that tlie trade might be diverted to Texas 
if a military road were constructed, since the distance from Santa 
Fe to Texas ports was much less than to St. Louis; and Texas 
would be the recipient of the vast profits realized. He sug- 
gested, also, that a military road would serve to conciliate the 
western part of the Texan territory, and the two sections would 
be bound closely together.^"' 

Lamar, in his message to Congress, November 12, 1839, re- 
ferred to this subject, and discussed the importance of the Santa 
Fe trade without recommending any action by Congress at that 
time." 

Lamar was intensely interested in extending the trade of the 
republic. In his inaugural address in December, 1838, he had 
expressed himself in favor of free trade ; and in the instructions to 
the various ministers sent to Europe, he always suggested the 
policy of offering favorable commercial privileges in return for 
recognition of independence. In February, 1839, he issued a proc- 
lamation, after Congress had passed an act to that effect, opening 
trade between the western settlements of Texas and the Mexicans 

"Yoakum, History of Texas, II, 313. 
^*Lamar Papers, No. 1529. 



The Santa Fe Expedition 109 

on the Eio Grande.^^ This action was a result of the revolt of 
Canales against the centralists, and did not carry any recognition 
of Mexican rights to the east of the Rio Grande. 

A considerable trade had developed between Santa Fe and St. 
Louis on one side, and between Santa Fe and Matamoras on the 
other. This had its beginning after the expedition of Pike, 
though it was not until 1821 or 1822 that any appreciable success 
attended the efforts of merchants to open trade — at the time that 
Stephen F. Austin left Missouri with his colonists and settled in 
Texas. In 1833 and 1834 the government of the United States 
found it necessary to give military aid to the expeditions on ac- 
count of the hostility of the Indians. '^^ In 1839 an effort was 
made to open direct trade between Van Buren, Arkansas, and 
Chihuahua, Mexico, an account of which appeared in the Telegraph 
and Texas Register on July 17, 1839, probably stimulating the 
interest of the government and people of Texas in trade with 
Mexico. 

During the fall and winter of 1839-1840, the possibility and 
desirability of getting control of the Santa Fe trade was under 
discussion by the people and newspapers. The editor of The Sen- 
tinel, published at Austin, said that he had frequently been asked 
as to the feasibility of establishing direct communication with 
Santa Fe. He estimated that the distance from Austin to Santa 
Fe was about four hundred and fifty miles. The road, he said, 
was through a rich, rolling, well-watered country. The distance 
from Austin to the old San Saba fort was estimated at one hun- 
dred and twenty-five miles, and the writer said that the old 
Spanish road could be followed from Gonzales to that place. The 
Santa Fe road, it was stated, passed through a beautiful country 
at the headwaters of the Red River, where there was good grazing. 
A small force would be sufficient, as there were no enemies except 
the Comanches, and fifty well-armed men would suffice for pro- 
tection against them. Finally, the Texan traders would have 
every advantage over those from St. Louis. ^'^ 

About the time this was published, and just before it "-tppeared 
in tlie Telegraph and Texas Register, William G. Dryden, who 

''^Lamar Papers, No. 1079. 

'"(Tregg, Commerce of the Prairies, T, 24, 31. 

"Telegraph and Texas Register, April 8, 1840. 



110 Miraheau Buonaparte Lamar 

had spent a number of years in Santa Fe appeared in Texas. He 
was sent on April 1, 1840, to Lamar with a letter of introduction 
by William H. Jack of Brazoria.^® Jack introduced him as a 
former officer in the Mexican service who was well acquainted in 
Santa Fc, Dryden's report of the conditions in Santa Fe must 
have been favorable, as we find Lamar issuing an address to "The 
Citizens of Santa Fee" two weeks later. 

In this letter, which was probably carried to Santa Fe by Dry- 
den, he saluted the citzens of Santa Fe as "Friends and Com- 
patriots." He referred to the revolution which had emancipated 
Texas from the "thralldom of Mexican domination." The revo- 
lution was forced upon them by circumstances too imperative to 
be resisted. The Anglo-American population of Texas had left 
the comforts and the enlightened liberty of their own country, and 
had migrated to Texas under the guarantee of the Constitution 
of 1824. They had witnessed many civil wars, and had hoped 
that calamities would harmonize the government, and teach the 
authorities of Mexico that frequent political changes and do- 
mestic discords were destructive of the prosperity and character 
of a people. Texas had resolved to be free, when a military 
despotism arose with the forcible abrogation of the Constitution 
of 1824. Impelled by the highest considerations, which a be- 
nignant providence had sanctified by conferring an unexampled 
prosperity upon them, they had asserted and achieved their inde- 
pendence, and had entered the great family of nations. They 
had been recognized by "the illustrious Government of the United 
States, and by the ancient Monarchy of France," and other powers 
of Europe were ready to extend the right hand of fellowship. 
Their natural resources were in rapid progress of development; 
the population was increasing by numerous accessions from Europe 
and the United States, and their commerce was extending with a 
power and celerity seldom equalled in the history of nations. 

All this was introductory to what follows. "Under these au- 
spicous circumstances," he said, 

we tender to you, a full participation in all our blessings. The 
great River of the North, which you inhabit, is the natural and 
convenient boundary of our territory, and we shall take great 
pleasure in hailing you as fellow-eitizens, members of our Young 

"Jack to Lamar, April 1, 1840, Lamar Papers, No. 1757. 



The Santa Fe Expedition 111 

Eepublic^ and co-aspirants with us for all the glory of establishing 
a new and happy and free Nation. Our constitution is as liberal 
as a rational and enlightened regard to human infirmities will 
safely permit. It confers equal political privileges on all; toler- 
ates all Eeligions without distinction, and guarantees an even 
uniform and impartial administration of the laws. 

He hoped the communication would be received by them and 
the public authorities in the same spirit in which it was dictated. 
And then he announced that if nothing intervened to change his 
resolution, he would despatch in time to arrive "in your section 
of Country about the ninth of September proxima, one or more 
commissioners, gentlemen of worth and confidence to explain more 
minutely the condition of our country, of the seaboard and the 
co-relative interests which so emphatically recommend and ought 
perpetually to cement the perfect union and identity of Santa Fee 
and Texas.'' The commissioners were to be accompanied by a 
military escort for the purpose of repelling any hostile Indians 
that might infest the passage, and with the further view of as- 
certaining the opening of a safe and convenient route of com- 
munication between the two sections of country, "which being 
strongly assimilated in interest, we hope to see united in friend- 
ship and consolidated under a common Government." Until the 
arrival of those commissioners he was appointing some of their 
own citizens, William G. Dryden, John Eowland, and William 
Workmiin, to whom the views of the Texan government had been 
communicated, to confer with them upon the subject matter of 
the communication.^** 

In spite of this assurance, no action was taken to carry out the 
purposes expressed in the letter. For the whole of the summer 
and until October, all the Texan forces were engaged in warfpre 
with the Comanches. Besides, a total lack of funds prevented 
the carrying out of the policy of Lamar at that time. Under 
these circumstances, he appealed to Congress, which met in Novem- 
ber, to supply the funds and take the necessary steps to bring 
Santa Fe under the political and commercial control of Texas. 

The Congress had been elected on an issue of retrenchment, and 
was by no means warm to the plans of Lamar from the beginning. 
Besides, Sam Houston had succeeded in making himself a leader 

"Lamar to the Citizens of Santa Fe, April 14, 1840, Lamar Papers, 1773. 



112 Miraheau Buonaparte Lamar 

of the anti-administration forces in Congress, and, as will be seen, 
was able to defeat appropriations for the project. 

On November 9, 1840, Representative Usher, a friend of the 
administration, introduced a resolution requesting the committee 
on the state of the republic to take into consideration the pro- 
priety and expediency of passing a law with the view to inform 
the inhabitants of Santa Fe of their privileges as citizens of the 
republic of Texas. ^" On the same day Representative Miller of 
Austin, a friend of Houston's, introduced, a resolution instructing 
the committee on finance to inquire into the expediency of laying 
off and setting apart so much of the public domain intermediate 
and equidistant between Austin and Santa Fe, as might be adapted 
to the establishment of a colony of actual settlers, with a view 
to opening, facilitating, and securing the trade of Santa Fe.^^ Out 
of this second resolution grew the notorious "Franco-Texienne" 
bill, which was ardently supported by the French minister, Sal- 
igny, and the opponents of the administration, led by Sam Hous- 
ton. As this was an alternative measure to the policy of the ad- 
ministration, a somewhat full examination is necessary. 

This bill proposed to create a corporation headed by two French- 
men, Jean Pierre Hippolyte Basterreche, and Pierre Francois de 
Hassauex, which contracted to introduce within the republic eight 
thousand families by January 1, 1849. For this purpose three 
million acres of land were granted to the corporation, on the con- 
dition that all the terms of the contract were carried out. The 
land was to be divided as follows : 512,000 acres fronting one 
hundred miles on the Rio Grande, above the Presidio road, and 
eight miles in depth ; 192,000 acres on the iSTueces, above the Pre- 
sidio road, on both sides of the river, six miles in width and twenty- 
one in length; 194,000 acres on the Rio Frio; 128,000 acres ex- 
tending from the Arroyo Seco to the Arroj^o Uvalde; 128,000 
acres on the Guadalupe above the mouth of Sabine Creek ; 1,000,000 
acres, in three tracts between the Colorado and San Saba; 192,000 
acres from the Colorado to the Pasegona river, three miles and 
one hundred miles along the old Santa Fe road ; 294,000 acres on 
Red River, next above the Cross Timbers, fronting forty-six miles 
and two miles in depth; 50,000 acres at the head of the Nueces; 

^"5 Tex. Cong., 1 Sess., House Journal, 45. 
"Tbid., 43. 



The Santa Fc Expedition 113 

50,000 acres at the head of the Colorado; 50,000 acres on the 
Aguihi river; 50,000 acres near the source of the Little river; 
50,000 acres oil the Brazos, thirty miles above the Palo Pinto 
creek ; 50,000 acres on the Xoland river, fifty miles above its 
mouth ; 50,000 acres in the forks of the Trinity, west of the Cross 
Timbers. The company was also to maintain a line of military 
posts from a point thirty miles -above the town of Presidio, and 
extending to the Red River, at some point near the Cross Timbers. 
This line was to consist of twenty posts, which were to be main- 
tained for a period of twenty 3'-ears. They were also to keep up 
lines of communication between the posts, and were to appoint a 
sufficient number of geologists, mineralogists, and botanists to ex- 
plore the whole country and report on all mines found. They 
were to open and work all mines found, and give fifty per cent 
of the proceeds to the Republic of Texas. 

Practical autonomy was granted to the colonists by the pro- 
vision that they might make by-laws not in violation of the Texas 
Constitution. Another attractive feature from the standpoint of 
the colonists was that the lands were to be exempt from taxation 
until January 1, 3845.-^ 

This remarkable bill actually passed the House of Representa- 
tives, and came near to passing the Senate. It is likely that it 
M'ould have passed the upper House except for the opposition of 
Lamar.--"* The defeat of this bill aroused the bitter opposition of 
Saligny to the Government, and unfortunately, he was abetted by 
the opponents of the administration in denouncing those who 
voted against the bill. 

President Lamar had been in poor health during a good part 
of his administration, and on December ]2, he had become so ill 
that he found it necessary to apply to Congress for a leave of 
absence so that he could go to New Orleans for treatment. He 
did not return to his duties until February, 1841, after Congress 
adjourned. In his absence, however, the Senate passed the admin- 
istration bill providing for the opening of communications with 
Santa Fe.^* This bill was received by the House on January 15, 
whereupon Representative Murchison introduced a substitute bill 

-Austiv City Gazette. Jvily 21, 1841; Brown. History of Texas. II. 187. 
='See Mavfield to Salifrnv, :\rarch 29. 1841. and Mavfiokl to :kroTntosh, 
May 12. 1841, Garrison. Dip. Cor. Tex.. TIT. 1315; 1326. 
==^5 Tex. Conf-r. 1 Sess., House Journal, 509. 



114 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 

authorizing the President to raise volunteers to make an expedi- 
tion to Santa Fe. This principle was accepted by the committee 
on the state of the republic, and five days later was reported to 
the House as a substitute for the Senate measure. On January 
26 the House defeated the Senate bill by a vote of sixteen to nine- 
teen, and passed the substitute measure by a majority of two, 
Houston working against both bills. -° The Senate failed to agree 
to tlie substitute measure, and the session came to a close without 
legislative approval of the expedition to Santa Fe, but apparently 
the principle was accepted by both Houses, and they were only 
unable to agree to the particular method to be used in cari-ying 
out the project. 

Lamar returned to the Capital in February, 1841, and imme- 
diately began preparations to despatch an expedition to Santa Fe 
in spite of the failure of Congress to make provision for it. He 
issued a long proclamation to the people of Santa Fe, calling upon 
them peacefully to accept Texan rule, and guaranteeing them the 
privileges mentioned in his letter of April, 1840.^*^ He appointed 
Hugh McLeod military commander of the expedition, and, since 
Congress had failed to make appropriations for the regular army, 
authorized him to raise volunteers to accompany the expedition. 
He took upon himself the authority to order the secretary of the 
treasury to instruct the comptroller to open on his books an appro- 
priation for fitting out the Santa Fe expedition,^'^ and Major 
George T. Howard was sent to New Orleans to purchase supplies. 

The volunteers for the expedition began to arrive in Austin 
early in May, and went into camp on Brushy Creek, about twenty 
miles north of Austin.^^ The party was collecting for the next 
month, the last group leaving Austin on June 18, accompanied 
by President Lamar, and the secretary of the treasury, J. G. 
Chalmers; and on June 21, the whole body set out on the long 
march to Santa Fe. 

The expedition consisted of a military escort consisting of two 
hundred and seventy volunteers under the command of General 
Hugh McLeod, and about fifty other persons, consisting of Gen- 

-'•'Ihid.. 518, 555, 610. 

=°A copy of the proclamation in in Lamar Papers, No. 1942. 
"Lamar to Chalmers. Secretary of the Treasury. March 24, 1S41, Yoakum, 
History of Texas, II, .323, note. 

^"Austin City Gazette, May 12, 1841. 



The Santa Fe Expedition 115 

eral McLeod's staff, merchants, tourists, servants, and the civil 
commissioners who were to take over the civil government of the 
province in case of success. '** 

The commissioners, William G. Cooke, J. Antonio Navarro, 
Eiehard F. Brenham, and William G. Dryden, being expected to 
take over the civil affairs, the instructions of the state department 
were directed to them. According to these instructions, the com- 
missioners were appointed to accompan)^ the military expedition 
about to start for Santa Fe, and they were to have the chief direc- 
tions of the expedition. The expedition had been organized by 
the President, the acting secretary of state said, for the purpose 
of opening a communication with that portion of the republic 
known as Santa Fe, and of closely uniting it with the rest of the 
republic, "so that the Supremacy of our constitution and laws 
may be asserted equally over the entire tract of country embraced 
within our limits; but as that portion is inhabited by a people 
strangers to our institutions and to our system of Government, 
speaking a different language, and deriving their origin from an 
alien source, whose religion, laws, manners and customs, all differ 
so widely from our OAvn, the greatest circumspection will be neces- 
sary, in making kno^\Ti to that people the object of your mission, 
on your first arrival in Santa fe and subsequently in conducting 
your intercourse with them," 

The great object of the President, he said, was to attach the 
people of the district of Santa Fe to the Texas system of govern- 
ment, and to create in their minds a reverence for the Texan 
Constitution; and to spread among them a spirit of liberty and 
independence, which would alone qualify them for good citizens, 
under a government, the very existence of which, depended upon 
the viall of the people. 

The President had no illusions as to the possible manner of 
reception of the expedition; and the com.missioners were instructed 
to conduct themselves with caution, and to require the same 
of the military command entrusted to their charge. It was ex- 
pected that they would meet with opposition from narrow-minded 
persons, but the President believed that patience and good judg- 
ment would accomplish their purpose. 

Their first object upon enterina' the city of Santa Fe was to 

^'Kendall. Texan Santa Fe Expedition, 72. 



116 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 

attempt to get possession of all the public property; but they were 
to hesitate to use force if the property were not surrendered peace- 
ably. "The people of Santa fe are our fellow citizens," said the 
Secretary of State, 

and it cannot bs long before they will be fully incorporated with 
us, partaking of all the advantages and benefits which we enjoy, 
under our form of government. ... If they can be brought with 
their own free will and consent, to submit quietly and cheerfully 
to an incorporation with us, acknowledging themselves a con- 
stituent portion of the Eepublic, and setting into operation our 
constitution and laws, then may we confidently expect of them, 
fidelity and patriotism; but if they are awed into submission by 
threats, or still worse if they are driven to it by the application 
of Military power, the disasterous consequences that must in- 
evitably follow, cannot well be foreseen. 

The commissioners were to be left largely to their own resources 
in accomplishing the purposes of the government, but several 
arguments were submitted for their guidance. In the first place, 
they were to assure the people of Santa Fe of the protection of 
the government in the enjoyment of life, liberty, trial by jury, 
freedom from forced loans, and from all taxes levied without their 
consent; at the same time they were to hold before their eyes the 
folly of resistance. Emphasis was to be placed on the fact that 
by coming under the government of Texas they were to have equal 
representation in Congress as based upon population. 

In case all obstacles were overcome, after taking possession of 
the custom-houses, books, money, archives, they were to appoint 
such persons as they might think proper for the government of 
the city; and were advised to appoint local men as far as pos- 
sible. After familiarizing themselves with the conditions, they 
were to propose the sending of three commissioners to Austin, 
who were to have a seat in the Congress, with the right to dis- 
cuss any proposition coming before the body, but without a right 
to vote. 

In view of the fact that some of the Texan politicians of the 
day, and many people in the United States, understood it to be 
Lamar's intention to conquer with a force of two hundred and 
Feventy men a province of Mexico lying hundreds of miles from 
the frontier of his own government, the following quotation from 
the official instructions is inserted, which indicnt(s that no such 



The Santa Fe Expedition ll'<' 

purpose was in his mind. After stating that the foregoing in- 
structions were based on the supposition that no force would be 
opposed by the citizens of Santa Fe, and that in case of opposition 
the commissioners must rely upon their own discretion, the in- 
structions continued : 

The President anxious as he is to have our National flag ac- 
knowledged in Santa fe, does not consider it expediant at this time 
to force it upon that portion of the Eepubhc. If the Mexican 
authorities are prepared to defend the place with arms, and if 
you can satisfy yourselves that they will be supported by the mass 
of the people, no good result can come from risking a battle; for 
if our arms are successful, a strong Military force would be neces- 
sary to hold possession of the place, the cost of keeping which, to 
say nothing of other objections equally forcible, would of itself be 
sufficient; and it they are unfortunate, the evils that would flow 
from it are sufficiently apparent. In this case therefore, you 
will not be authorized to risk a battle. 

It was to be expected that much would be made of the com- 
mercial possibilities of the expedition, yet we find that little atten- 
tion was paid to that subject. "As valuable as their trade is," 
said the instructions, 

and solicitous as the President is to open its advantages to the 
citizens of this country, he yet owes a paramount duty to the 
constitution, and has directed me to instruct you, that you are 
to make no arrangement, stipulation or agreement whatever with 
the inhabitants, for the admission of Texan goods into that Dis- 
trict of country, by which Texan Citizens will be required to 
pay any duties" to them. We claim the jurisdiction, and con- 
sequently the right to demand the revenue, and if we cannot en- 
force our right, we must at least do nothing to impair it. . . . 
The object of the expedition being to conciliate the people of 
Santa fe, to incorporate them with us, and to secure to our 
citizens all the benefits arising from the valuable trade carried 
on with them. It may be necessary to diminish the tariff to a 
still lower rate to effect these objects; but nothing short of neces- 
sity will justify any interference with the rates established by 
Con^rrcss, and of this necessity the collector of customs must be 
the Judge.^" 

At the same time that the above instructions were given to the 
four commissioners, a separate list was given to Cooke, who was to 

"Acting Secretary of State Eoberts to William G. Cooke, etc., June 15, 
1841. Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., II, 737-743. 



118 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 

be resident commissioner and have charge of the government after 
the other commissioners had returned to Texas. These instruc- 
tions constituted Cooke the ruler of Santa Pe under the laws of 
the Eepublic of Texas, and of course were to be effective only in 
case the expedition accomplished its purpose.^^ 

As I have said, the last detachment of volunteers and guests 
left Austin for the camp on Brushy Creek. Among these was 
George Wilkins Kendall, editor of the New Orleans Picayune, who 
had decided to join the expedition when he became acquainted 
with Major George T. Howard, who was purchasing supplies in 
New Orleans, and who was invited to join the expedition as a 
guest of the government. Kendall has given us an extensive 
account of the trip from its beginning to his release from a Mexi- 
can prison.^^ Also with this last detachment rode the President 
of the republic. During their ride to Brushy Creek from Austin 
they stopped for lunch in the middle of the day, and Kendall was 
very much impressed by the fact that Lamar groomed his own 
horse and cooked his own dinner. "There was a specimen of 
Republican simplicity,'' he said, "the chief magistrate of a nation 
cooking his own dinner and grooming his own horse." He then 
paid this tribute to Lamar : "In all my intercourse with General 
Lamar I ever found him a courteous and honorable gentleman, 
possessing a brilliant intellect, which has been highly cultivated; 
and if Texas ever had a warm and untiring friend, it was and is 
Mirabeau B. Lamar."^^ 

Lamar and his party spent the night in camp, reviewed the 
various companies, and delivered an address to the assembled 
party, and then returned to Austin. The expedition got under 
way June 21, a month later than had been originally planned.^* 

In writing a biography of Lamar, we might perhaps leave the 
expedition here; for the group of men who set out with such con- 
fidence and so blithely on June 21 were not heard of again until 
several months after the close of Lamar's administration, and 
then they were prisoners of the Mexicans, on their way to Mexico 
City. But the failure of the expedition was made the excuse for 

■•^Roberts to Cooke. June 15, 1S41, in lUd.. 743-747. 
'"Narrative of the Texan Sania Fe Expedition. 
'"Kendall, 'Narrative, T, 69. 
^'Ihid., T, 71. 



The Santa Fe, Expedition 119 

bitter attacks on Lamar, and since historians have accepted the 
more or less superficial judgments of the time, it will be well to 
give a somewhat complete history of the expedition, and try to 
arrive at the causes for its failure. 

The first incident after leaving that contributed to the failure 
of the enterprise occurred only a few days after departure from 
the camp on Brushy Creek. Anticipating a journey of only six 
weeks or two months, provisions had been prepared for that 
length of time; but the long delay in getting under way had 
caused the consumption of the cattle to a large extent, and when 
the party pitched camp on Little River, June 24, only about sixty 
miles from Austin, it was found necessary to send back for mere 
beef cattle. The main body waited five days for these supplies, 
and, in the meantime, continued to consume the provisions which 
were not too plentiful.^^ 

They left the camp on Little Eiver on June 29, and traveling 
almost due northward, were almost a month in traversing the 
valley of the Brazos. On July 21, they came to the Cross Timbers, 
about two hundred miles from their starting place. About ten 
days were consumed in cutting their way through the Cross 
Timbers, the wagons of the merchants which accompanied the 
expedition making necessary roads of some description. At this 
point, it was necessary to cross the Brazos, which was accomplished 
with much difficulty. 

The purpose of the leaders was to go north to the Red River, 
and to follow that river to its source, whence only a short distance 
would remain to Santa F6, and that along the well marked trail 
from Santa Fe to St. Louis. The distance was much greater than 
a direct route, but they were unable to secure guides who knew 
the country to the northwest. It was to prove that they were no 
more fortunate in securing a guide for the longer journey. After 
leaving the Cross Timbers, July 31, their next destination was 
Red River. They soon came to the Wichita River which they 
mistook for the Red River, and followed it for several days, until 
they found slightly to the south, the headwaters of the Brazos, 
the river which they had crossed a month before. When this 
was discovered, a detachment was pent northward to explore for 
the Red River, and it was located about seventy-five miles north 

"Kendall. Narralive, I, S5. 



120 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 

of where the main body was encamped.^'' From this point I shall 
quote freely from the official report of William G. Cooke, the resi- 
dent commissioner. 

After many unexpected delays and embarrassments, that re- 
tarded our march beyond the time anticipated for our arrival in 
Santa Fe, we at length on the 29th August, reached a point on 
the Palo Duro a tributary of Eed Eiver beyond which there was 
apparently no further means of progressing with the wagons ac- 
companying the Command. Previous to this time, on the 11th, 
Mr. Howland our guide, was sent forward with two men, bearing 
a communication to Mr. Dryden our colleague in Santa Fe; we 
being at the time under the impression that we were within one 
hundred miles of that city — judging from the information of a 
Mexican whom we had also employed as a guide, who was a native 
of Taos and appeared to be familiar with the country through 
which we were passing. A few days after the departure of How- 
land the Mexican suddenly deserted in company with a private — 
an Italian named Brignoli. On our arrival at the Palo Duro 
the Commissary reported but five days ration of beef, other rations 
exhausted — the country in advance of us appeared impassable for 
wagons — and Indians in large numbers had made their appear- 
ance in the vicinity of our camp. Under these embarrassing cir- 
cumstances, when further progress with the entire command and 
train seemed impracticable, it was concluded that the undersigned, 
and a majority of the Commission should proceed forward with 
one-third of the escort to the nearest settlement to procure sup- 
plies and guide to furnish and conduct the troops into New 
Mexico. We left camp accordingly on the 31st August with 75 
soldiers under the command of Capt Sutton— who with the mer- 
chants and others formed a body of 97 men. It was our expecta- 
tion on leaving camp that we should arrive at settlements or 
strike a road that had been described to us leading to San Miguel, 
in five days march — but we saw no human being nor any sign of 
civilization until we reached the Moro a branch of Eed Eiver on 
the 11th Sept, where we met with som.e Mexican traders — they 
informed us that we were about 80 miles distant from San Miguel 
and that there was a wasron road leading from that place to within 
a short distance of our camp. We immediately sent back two of 
them with orders to Genl. McLeod to destroy the baggage wagons 
and follow us with all despatch. We continued our march and 
on the 14th Mr. G. Vanness our Secretary was despatched ahead 
to San Miguel to communicate with Mr. Dryden whom we expected 
to meet there and to gain some information respecting the condi- 
tion of the country — he was also directed to make arrangements 

^'Kendall, Narrative, passim. 



The Santa Fe Expedition 121 

for procuring supjDlies — he was accompanied by Maj. G. T. How- 
ard, Capt W. P. Lewis, Mr. Fitzgerald a mercliant of San Antonio 
and Mr. Kendall of New Orleans. 

The main body were forced to travel slowly on account of the 
condition of their horses, and arrived on the Pecos on September 
15 at a small town named Anton Chico, twenty miles from San 
Miguel. Here they were visited by a Mexican officer accompanied 
by seventy armed men, who informed them that the Governor of 
New Mexico was advancing to meet them with a large force, and 
ordered them to surrender their arms. "We declined holding any 
communication with him in regard to the object of our visit, 
. . . but informed him that we came with no hostile inten- 
tions toward the citizens of the country and positively refused to 
lay down our arms." 

They decided to remain at Anton Chico until they had received 
some intelligence from Van Ness, who was supposed to liave pro- 
ceeded to meet the governor. On the 16th they had another 
interview with the Mexican officer, and told him that unless they 
received some news from Van Ness by the following morning, 
they would proceed to San Miguel. The officer said that he 
would send a courier to Van Ness and order his return, and said 
that on the following day he would cross the river with his men 
and encamp near the Texans in order to prove their friendliness. 
"Up to this time," said the report, "no event had occurred that 
could justly excite feelings of hostility against us among the 
people we had met who had been treated by our men with the 
utmost courtesy, the provisions we had received had been paid 
for at double their customary value.'' 

On the following day the officer called on them with an express 
from the governor requesting them to pause until that function- 
ary could arrive. He stated that the governor was approaching 
with five thousand men and would bo in Anton Chico the follow- 
ing day. In the meantime the Mexican forces began to take posi- 
tions favorable to attack, and the Texans assumed a posture of 
defence, expecting every moment to be attacked by the forces 
under Salezar. "There was no longer any doubt as to the inten- 
tions of the Mexicans," continued the report, 

and we were momentarily expecting a conflict, when Capt Lewis 
galloped over to us in company with Don Manuel Chavis kinsman 



123 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 

aud confidential agent of the Governor with authority to demand 
our surrender upon the following terms — That we should imme- 
diately give up our arms and remain at Anton Chico as prisoners 
of war on parole, until such time as supplies could be obtained 
for the subsistence of our troops in returning to Texas — that on 
no condition could we be allowed to proceed further into Mexican 
territory, but that as soon as provisions were procured we should 
be escorted beyond the frontier, where the arms, horses and private 
property of the officers and men should be restored to them. — 
These terms were offered by Mr. Chavis, with the most solemn 
pledges for their fulfillment, seconded by the assurances of Capt 
Lewis in whom at that time we reposed the utmost confidence. 

And then follows the story of Lewis's treachery. Lewis in- 
formed the commissioners that he had gone with Van Ness and 
Howard to execute the orders of the commissioners, when all 
three were surrounded and taken prisoners by the Mexicans. They 
were about to be shot when some explanations Lewis made caused 
the Mexicans to release them; and they were conducted to the 
governor. The governor, Lewis said, released him and sent him 
back on parole. He stated that the people of the country were 
all arrayed in arms against the invaders, and greatly exasperated 
against them on account of the false reports that had been cir- 
culated as to the object of the expedition by the deserter Brignoli. 
He then told them that he had left the governor within twelve 
miles of Anton Chico with two thousand troops, and that he 
would shortly be joined by two thousand more, all well armed 
and disciplined. As a result of this, and on account of his argu- 
ment that the lives of the whole party depended upon surrendering 
their arms at once, "Under these circumstances," said Cooke's 
report, 

without provisions for our men, our horses broken down by long 
and weary marches, deprived of any hope of aid from our main 
body by a distance of two hundred miles, with an enemy before 
us with more than five times our numbers and should we be vic- 
torious in the present fight of which we had no doubt, the prosp^^ct 
of being attacked by several thousand fresh troops in less than 
twenty four hours — in this situation and considering that we were 
specially instructed to avoid hostilities should the people them- 
selves be opposed to us, we concluded the best and most prudent 
course we could adopt was an acceptance of the terms proposed, 
and consequently we surrendered. 



The Santa Fe Expedition 123 

Governor Armijo arrived at Anton Chico on the 18th with less 
than one thousand men, and immediately distributed the arms of 
the Texans among the Mexicans, and started the Texans on their 
long march to Mexico City. At the same time he moved forward 
to meet the body which had been left behind on August 31 under 
General McLeod. Efforts had been made to inform McLeod of 
the fate of the advance party of ninety-seven men, but they failed, 
and McLeod received the same treatment as the others, being 
forced to surrender one hundred and eighty-two men, who were 
sent after the first group to Mexico City.^'^ 

It is not my purpose to follow the prisoners on their painful 
journey on foot to the city of Mexico, nor to follow the negotia- 
tions for their release. It is sufficient here to say that in the 
spring, after seven months in prison, through the intervention 
of the foreign ministers in Mexico, all the prisoners who could 
show themselves to be citizens of the United States or some 
European country were released. The Texans, with the exception 
of Navarro, who was bitterly hated by Santa Anna, were released 
in the summer, and by the close of 1843 most of them were again 
in Texas.^* I shall, however, examine the various causes given 
for the failure of the expedition, and consider the criticisms and 
defence of the administration for undertaking the enterprise. 

For the sake of clearness let me summarize at this point the 
developments connected with the sending of the expedition. The 
Texans claimed, partly as a result of the treaty of May 14, 1836, 
with Santa Anna, and partly on account of a statute, passed in 
December, 1836, that the boundary extended along the R^o Grande 
to its source, which would include Santa Fe. Lamar, on coming 
into office, was advised by his friends and received favorably their 
advice to undertake a politico-military expedition to Santa Fe, 
partly for the purpose of establishing commercial connections, but 
also for the purpose of establishing political control over that part 
of New Mexico. Various other interests prevented the under- 
taking until the summer of 1841. In the meantime, however, 

*'W. G. Cookf!' and R. F. Erenham to Secretary of State, November 9, 
1841. Santa Fe Papers. This report was sent from Allende, Chihuahua, 
Mexico, as they were on their way to Mexico City. It did not arrive in 
Texas until February of the following year, after Lamar's term of office 
had expired. 

"Garrison, Texas, 246. 



124 Miraheau Buonaparte Lamar 

Lamar had been in communication with men who had lived at 
Santa Fe, and had received assurances that the populace were 
very much dissatisfied with the rule of Armijo, the governor, and 
would welcome a Texan force. As a result of this he sent a letter 
to the citizens of Santa Fe, and appointed three commissioners 
to prepare the ground for the coming of the Texans. He at- 
tempted to secure some authorization from Congress for the ex- 
pedition during the session of 1840-1841, but due to an economiz- 
ing spirit, and on account of the opposition of Houston, and as 
a result of a difference of opinion as to how military aid should 
be extended to the merchants, nothing was done by Congress. In 
spite of this, Lamar called for volunteers, ordered an appropria- 
tion opened on the books of the comptroller for fitting out the 
expedition, and on June 21, 1841, it left with his blessing, but 
to be taken captive in September, before ever they reached 
Santa Fe. 

Nothing having been heard of the expedition when the next 
Congress met in November, ]84], a reaction had set in, and the 
members were free in their criticism of the President's action. 
The House of Eepresentatives appointed a select committee to 
investigate the whole subject. This committee reported on De- 
cember 6, and found that the President had violated the Consti- 
tution in ordering money paid out of the treasury without an 
appropriation by Congress, and that his action in enlisting an 
army of volunteers without the sanction of Congress was in viola- 
tion of the Constitution. They found that for the expenses of the 
expedition $89,549.69 had been expended. ^^ The quarter-master- 
general, on the other hand, reported the sum of $78,421.51.*"* 

The committee did not find that any of the rights of Mexico 
had been overridden, and there is every evidence that it was con- 
sidered purely as a matter of domestic concern, and the question 
was one merely of constitutionality. Houston held the same view, 
as instanced by his letter to Santa Anna, March 21, 1842. In this 
letter he defended the claims to the Rio Grande as a western 
boundary, and iusisted that the prisoners should be released, since 
it was no concern of Santa Anna. At the same time, he said that 

''Austin. Oity Gazette, December 15, 1841. 
^Army Papers, 1840-1841. Texas State Library. 



The Santa Fe Expedition 125 

Lamar had acted unconstitutionally in sending the expedition 
without the approval of CongTess.^^ 

This criticism was probably justified. It must be remembered, 
however, that Lamar had considered sending the expedition on 
his own account ever since the matter first came into his mind, 
and he did not consider the approval of Congress necessary. Nor- 
mally the regular army was under his command, and could be 
sent anywhere in the republic that he wished to send it; and he 
conceived it to be a legitimate use of the army to protect mer- 
chants in opening up trade which all public men favored. It was 
the failure of Congress to make any provision for the regular 
army in the session of 1840-1841, that made it necessary for 
Lamar to take the matter into his own hands. He justified him- 
self in this, however, by saying that the principle had been ac- 
cepted by both houses, and it was only the details on which they 
could not agree. 

Assuming that the claims of Texas to the Rio Grande were 
just, and nobody in Texas denied it at that time, was Lamar 
justified in his assumption that the people of Santa Fe would 
accept Texas sovereignty without a struggle? The instructions to 
the commissioners prove that Lamar had no grandiose schemes of 
conquest, and that he was not under the illusion that he was able 
at that distance to maintain control over New Mexico in case there 
was resistance on the part of the people of New Mexico them- 
selves. The whole expedition was planned on the assumption that 
the people of Santa Fe would welcome the Texans. And Lamar 
was not alone in this assumption. The revolt of 1837-1838 against 
the central authorities, and the complaints which had come to 
Texas concerning the rule of Armijo, who had put down the revolt, 
together with the assurances of Dryden, who Avas in Texas in 1810, 
convinced the people of Texas that no difficulty would be en- 
countered in taking possession of Santa Fe. "The universal im- 
pression in Texas was/' says Kendall, 

that the inhabitants of Santa Fe were anxious to throw off a yoke, 
which was not only galling, but did not of right belong to them, 
and rally under the "lone star" banner; and events which have 
since transpired, and which- 1 shall refer to hereafter, have con- 
vinced me that sucli was the feeling of the population. Should 

^'Houston to Santa Anna, March 21, 1842, lYiies Register, LXII, 98. 



126 Miraheau Buonaparte Lamar 

any opposition be made to the peaceable entry of the Texan 
pioneers, it was thought that it would come from the few regular 
troops always stationed at Santa Fe by the government of Mexico ; 
and this force would have easily been put down if a large majority 
of the residents were in favor of such a course. 

William G. Dryden, who had been in Austin in March and 
April, 1840, returned to Santa F6 on September 17, and imme- 
diately began holding conferences with the people and governor 
of Santa Fe. On March 10, 1841, he wrote: 

Ever since I arrived on the 17th of last Septr., we have been 
looking for some news from Texas — Because every American, and 
more than two thirds of the Mexicans, and all the Pueblo Indians 
are with us heart and soul; and whenever they have heard of your 
sending Troops, there has been rejoicing : and indeed I have talked 
many times with the Governor, and he says he would be glad to 
see the day of your arrival in this country, as he feels well assured 
that no aid will be sent from below, as they have no means, and 
he himself will make no resistance 

I assured all my friends you would send last fall — I now have 
pledged myself, this summer; and I shall never lose hope as long 
as life shall last. I trust, if all things are right, before you re- 
ceive this, the force will be under march, and near here. It will 
but be a trip of pleasure.*- 

This letter did not reach Lamar until August, after the expedi- 
tion had left, but indicates that this man who had lived loDg 
among them thought the people of Santa Fe would welcome the 
Texan expedition. 

An interesting testimony to the same effect is contained in a 
letter of an x4merican Santa Fe trader to the St. Louis Bulletin in 
the fall of 1841. The writer related some of the incidents of the 
trip which he had just completed from Santa Fe, and with regard 
to the Texan expedition said : 

No news had been received at the time of the departure of the 
Texan expedition. A ready submission on the part of the inhabi- 
tants is to be anticipated; but the number sent from Texas, with- 
out reinforcements, is entirely too small to retain possession of 
the country. Should they arrive at all in Santa Fe it is said 
they must suffer for want of supplies, as great scarcity of food in 
that quarter is looked for for the coming winter.*^ 

*^Dryden to Lamar, March 10, 1841, Santa Fc Papers, Texas State 
Library; Austin City Q-a^ette. August 25, 1841. 
"Copied from St. Louis Bulletin in Niles Register, LXI, 100. 



The Santa Fe Expedition 127 

Unquestionably the reception accorded to the expedition was 
not in accordance with the hopes or expectations of the Tcxans, 
of Dryden, and of the anonymous American writer. Was this 
due to the fact that the observers misunderstood the attitude of 
the people of Santa Fe, and that there was never the willingness 
to change allegiance that was ascribed to them; or was it due to 
a change in sentiment before the Texans arrived, and before the 
agents in Santa Fe could communicate to the authorities of Texas? 
Both were partly true, it seems. Apparently no secret Avas made 
of the plans of the Texans, either in Texas, or by the commission- 
ers residing in Santa F6; so ample opportunity was given for 
counter-preparations in case the Mexican government opposed 
Texan occupation of Santa Fe. Dryden had been discussing the 
subject since September, 1840, and there had been ample time 
for Armijo to communicate with his home government; but in 
case the governor were disloyal, the central authorities had ample 
opportunity to learn of the project from other sources. 

On the day after the Santa Fe party took their departure from 
the camp on Brushy Creek, Rafael Uribe, an emissary of General 
Mariano Arista, commander of the Northern Army of Mexico, ar- 
rived in Austin with a letter from his commander to "Mr. Mirabeau 
Lamar." The substance of this letter was that Arista was anxious 
to come to some agreement with the Texan authorities with regard 
to the border brigandage which was taking place. Lamar refused 
to receive this emissary because the letter was improperly ad- 
dressed, but he took the opportunity of sending two commissioners 
to the camp of Arista empowered to treat on the subject.** The 
rejected commissioner was able to learn of the departure of the 
Santa Fe expedition, and to give information to his government 
regarding it. Governor Armijo and the other authorities had 
been advised that an invasion froin Texas was probable, and after 
the departure of McLeod and his party, special warnings had been 
sent from the city of Mexico ordering him to keep a constant look- 
out for the party. Eeinforcements were promised him in case 
of need.*^ 

Twitchell is of the opinion that while some dissatisfaction did 
exist among the native people owing to the official abuses of 

^'Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., II, 748. 

'"'Twitchell, Leading Facts of New Mexican Uistorv, II, 74. 



128 Miraheau Buonaparte Lamar 

-Ariuijo, still the great majority of New Mexicans were not ready 
to hail the Texans as deliverers; and naturally Armijo, who was 
well settled in power himself and left to his own devices by the 
centra] authorities, was opposed to any change of government. 
As a consequence, every precaution was taken, and among the 
common classes the Texans M^ere represented as being a "choice 
assortment of reckless and desperate men, from whom nothing 
•other than pillage, murder and outrage could be expected."*® That 
the governor should be averse to accepting Texan control and 
^'iving up his own office is entirely reasonable; but I cannot accept 
the view of Mr. Twitchell that there was not a large majority of 
the people of Santa Fe willing if not anxious to change to Texan 
sovereignty. 

It will be recalled that Dryden wrote to Lamar on March 10, 
and April 18, 1841, showing with what favor his mission had 
been received, and with what enthusiasm the people anticipated 
the coming of the Texans. Kendall, who with the advance guard 
was taken prisoner before arriving in Santa Fe, was convinced 
that the great majority of the people were anxious for the success 
of the Texans, and that the failure was due to fortuitous circum- 
stances over which the Texan authorities had no control. I feel 
constrained to quote in full the explanation given by Kendall for 
the failure of the enterprise. 

In the first place, the expedition began its march too late in the 
season by at least six weeks. Had it left Austin on the 1st of 
May, the grass would have been much better, and we should have 
had little difficulty in finding good water both for ourselves and 
cattle. In the second place, we were disappointed in obtaining a 
party of the Lipan Indians as guide, and were consequently obliged 
to take a route some three hundred miles out of the way, and in 
many places extremely difficult of travel. Thirdly, the govern- 
ment of Texas did not furnish wagons and oxen enough to trans- 
port the goods of the merchants, and this, as a matter of course, 
caused tedious delays. Fourthly, cattle enough on the ]ioof were 
not provided, even with the second supply sent for by the com- 
missioners from Little River. Again, the distance was vastly 
greater than we had anticipated in our widest and wildest calcu- 
lations, owing to which circumstance, and an improvident waste 
of provisions while in the buffalo range, we found ourselves upon 
half allowance in the very middle of our long journey — a privation 

^'Ihid., TI. 74. 



The Santa Fe Expedition 139 

which weakened, dispirited^ and rendered the men unfit for duty. 
The Indians also annoyed us much, by their harassing and con- 
tinual attempts to cut olT our small parties and steal our horses. 
Finally, the character of the governor of New Mexico was far 
from being understood, and his power was underrated by all. 
General Lamar's estimate of the views and feelings of the people 
of Santa Fe and the vicinity was perfectly correct; not a doubt 
can exist that they all were and are anxious to throw oft the op- 
pressive yoke of Armijo, and come under the liberal institutions 
of Texas: but tlie governor found us divided into small parties, 
broken down by long marches and want of food, discovered a 
traitor among us, too, and taking advantage of these circum- 
stances, his course was plain and his conquest easy,*' 

Granting that there was suffieient evidence of the friendly feel- 
ing of the people of Santa Fe, there is still sufficient grounds, 
even among the causes of failure listed by Kendall, for serious 
criticism of Lamar for undertaking the enterprise. It would seem 
tliat a careful executive would have so planned the expedition that 
the causes contributing to failure would be reduced to a minimum. 
Why did the expedition not start by the first of May? It was 
intended by tlie President that it should, and the delay was caused 
by the slowness with which men volunteered for the expedition. 
Why was not more known as to the distance? The actual dis- 
tance in an air line from Austin to Santa Fe was only a little less 
than a thousand miles, and the indirect route taken by tlie Texans 
Avas near thirteen hundred. Nobody in Texas at that time thought 
it was more than five hundred miles, however, and Lamar can 
hardly be blamed for adopting the universal view. Jefferson pur- 
chased Louisiana with less knowledge of that territory than Lamar 
possessed of the upper Rio Grande. The failure to provide suffi- 
cient supphes is natural when we consider the mistaken idea as 
to the distance. It does seem that Lamar should have known 
enough of the character of the Mexicans not to place ioo much 
confidence on the word of one of their rulers, and for this failure 
he was justly criticised. 

Lamar seems to have had a single-track mind, and wlien once 
he became convinced that an expedition to Santa Fe should be 
undertaken for the two-fold purpose of bringing that region under 
subjection to Texas and securing tlie valuable trade for Texas, 

"Kendall. Texan Santa Fe Expedition, I, 365-306. 



130 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 

he was unable to consider the effect of success or failure on the 
relations of Texas with Mexico. In fact, it seems that he con- 
sidered the question as entirely foreign to the interests of Mexico, 
and even while he was preparing the expedition, he was sending a 
minister to Mexico to treat on all questions at issue between 
Mexico and Texas, and, as we have seen, two days after the ex- 
pedition left he was sending commissioners to the camp of Gen- 
eral Arista for the purpose of arrangmg some means of stamping 
out brigand border warfare, and in order to keep open the com- 
merce of Texas with the western settlements of Mexico on the 
Eio Grande.*^ Andrew Jackson, who had continued his interest 
in Texas, understood the importance of ihis phase of the question, 
and on May 25, 1842, wrote to Houston a? follows: 

The wild goose campaign to Santa Fe was an ill-judged affair; 
and their surrender without the fire of a gun has lessened the 
prowess of the Texans in the minds of the Mexicans, and it will 
take another San Jacinto affair to restore their character.*^ 

The expedition failed, and it is easy to criticise a venture that 
has failed. It is easy to see how certain conditions should have 
been anticipated and guarded against, but none of Lamar's critics 
pointed out any of these things before the enterprise was under- 
taken, the only cause of opposition being the expense. Since it 
failed, however, there were many who were willing to criticise 
the plans and the policy, and one critic went so far as to demand 
that Lamar be sent to Mexico and be sacrified for the prisoners 
who were in Mexico at that time.^" But if it had succeeded, and 
there were strong evidences that it would succeed, Lamar would 
have added to Texas a tremendous territory, and would have se- 
cured valuable trade for Texas ports. It may be well enough to 
judge of its expediency from its failure, but to judge rightly the 
policy, one should take into consideration the plans and purposes 
of Lamar, and the seeming justification in his own mind at the 
time for the enterprise. 

^'Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., II, 748. 

"Jackson to Houston, May 25, 18*2, Yoakum. History of Texas, II, 329, 
note. 

""Lamar Papers, No. 



Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Administration 131 



Chapter VI 

FOKEIGN AFFAIRS DURING LAMAR's ADMINISTRATION 

When Lamar assumed the presidency the independence of Texas 
had been recognized only by the United States. This recognition 
had been extended just before the close of Jackson's administration. 
The Texan offer of annexation, which had been adopted by an 
almost unanimous vote in the summer of 1836, had been definitely 
rejected by the United States in August, 1837, and in October, 
1838, the minister of Texas to the United States, acting on in- 
structions from President Houston, withdrew it. This action was 
commended by Lamar in his inaugural address. Shortly after this 
address the Congress adopted resolutions endorsing the withdrawal 
of the offer, though the preceding Congress had refused to take 
such action. 

The withdrawal of the offer of annexation immediately gave 
Texas a better standing among the nations of the world. As long 
as England and France believed that Texas was only waiting for 
annexation to the United States, they were not materially inter- 
ested in its affairs, but now there seemed to be a favorable oppor- 
tunity for friendly relations or for exploitation, and the European 
countries became more interested in the development of Texas. 
Lamar made deliberate use of the changed attitude, advising Con- 
gress to levy only nominal tariff duties in order to draw the trade 
of the European countries, and instructing the various represent- 
atives of Texas in Europe to offer favorable commercial conces- 
sions in return for recognition of Texan independence. Partly as 
a result of this policy, and partly from other causes which I shall 
show in the proper place the first year of Lamar's administration 
saw the recognition of Texan independence by France, and during 
1840 England, Holland, and Belgium extended recognition. 

In the policy of standing aloof from the United States while 
pursuing friendly relations with England and France, Lamar was 
following in part the policy suggested by his predecessor though 
he gave vitality to it because of his well k-nown and strong oppo- 
sition to annexation. The policy of direct negotiation of peace 
with Afexico on the basis of the purchase of her territory by Texa> 



132 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 

began with Lamar, however, and during his administration he sent 
three separate agents to Mexico for this purpose, while numerous 
secret agents kept him informed of the developments. At the 
same time, while remaining oflBcially neutral, he gave some coun- 
tenance to the various revolts of the federalists against the cen- 
tralists in power at that time. I shall follow out with some detail 
these efforts to negotiate with Mexico, and also discuss the rela- 
tions between Texas and the United States, France, and England. 

1. Ejforts to Negotiate Peace with Mexico 

Just who was responsible for the idea of sending an agent to 
Mexico for direct negotiations, it is impossible to say. Lamar had 
nothing to say with regard to this policy in his inaugural address 
or in his message to Congress a few days later. In fact, the first 
time that he took Congress into his confidence was in November, 
1838, when he told the Congress in a secret session the result of 
the first mission, and announced that he had sent another. On 
September 12, 1838, James Morgan, an old friend of Lamar, sent 
him a confidential letter from a friend in New York, and asking 
his opinion of the project set forth.^ This enclosure has not been 
found, but a letter of December 27 from Morgan indicates that 
the friend in New York was James Treat, who afterward became 
a secret agent of Texas to Mexico, and that his suggestion was 
that a secret agent be sent from Texas to bring about overtures 
of peace from Mexico on a basis of the purchase of her own ter- 
ritory by Texas. Morgan advised the adoption of this policy.^ A 
short time afterward George L. Hammeken, who was also well 
acquainted with conditions in Mexico, wrote suggesting a peace 
commission to Mexico.-' This was followed by a letter from Samuel 
Plummer, another man who was acquainted with conditions in 
Mexico, advising similar action.* 

There was apparently no connection between these men, but all 
knew intimately the conditions in Mexico, and all advised the 
sending of a peace commission. All of them had lived in Mexico for 
some time or had just been there, and spoke with a full knowledge 
of conditions. It did not take their statements, however, to in- 

^Lamar Papers, No. 814. 

^Morgan to Lamar, December 27, 1838, Lamar Papers, No. 959. 
'Hammeken to Lamar. January 2, 1839, Lamar Papers, No. 984. 
'Plummer to Lamar, February 16, 1839, Lamar Papers, No. 1068. 



Foreign Affairs During Jjainar's AdminiHraMon 133 

dicate to Lamar and his advisers that if there was ever to be a 
propitious time for a negotiated peace, that was the time. 

For the greater part of 1838, and until March, 1839, the Mexi- 
can ports were blockaded by a French squadron. For several years 
there had been complaints on the part of French subjects in Mex- 
ico on account of unfair treatment, and the government of France 
had demanded a settlement of the claims of her citizens against 
Mexico. Despairing of an amicable settlement, the French min- 
ister withdrew from Mexico City on January IG, 1838, leaving the 
legation in charge of a charge d'affaires. Upon leaving Vera Cruz 
he was met by a French squadron under Bazoche, who had been 
instructed to support the demands of the minister with force. On 
March 21 Bazoche sent an ultimatum to the Mexican government 
demanding the immediate payment of $600,000 to be applied to 
the claims of French citizens. Four days later the Mexican gov- 
ernment announced its refusal to accede to the demands, and re- 
fused to discuss the matter unless the French squadron retired.^ 
On April 16 Bazoche acted upon his threat and announced that 
diplomatic relations were suspended and the ports blockaded, not 
against the nation, as he said, but against the government. This 
was probably to weaken the government of Bustamante, which was 
already growing unpopular.® A French squadron stood off Vera 
Cruz and effectively prevented the entrance or egress of any ves- 
sels, thus seriously crippling the finances of the country. This 
blockade continued throughout the summer with the acquiescence 
of Great Britain, and to the delight of the Texans. 

While the French were blockading the ports of Mexico, the fed- 
eralists used the opportunity to break out in revolts in various 
parts of the country. The adoption of the centralized constitution 
in 1835, which had resulted in the Texas revolution, and which 
had caused an outbreak in New Mexico in 1837, had never been 
universally accepted. In the summer of ^ 1838 the discontent made 
itself felt in uprisings in Sonora, Sinaloa, California, Tamaulipas, 
and Yucatan. The most serious of these was in Sonora and Sin- 
aloa, headed by Urrea. TJrrea seized the custom-house at Guay- 
mas and restored the federalist system. He was defeated at Ma- 
zatlan on May 6, 1838, but wont to Tampico and stirred up a re- 

"Bancroft, History of Mexico, V, 187,. 188; C. M. Bustamante, Cabinete 
Mexican a, I, 112. 

"Bancroft, History of Mexico, V, 189. 



134 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 

volt there in October. 1838. The government of Bustaniante was 
very weak, and no effective steps were taken to put down and pun- 
ish the rebels. The cutting off of imports left the country with- 
out funds, and Congress took no steps to remedy matters.^ 

Late in October Admiral Baudin arrived at Vera Cruz with 
additional ships and took over command of the French squadron. 
He was authorized by his government to enter into negotiations 
for the settlement of the difficulties. He at once got into com- 
munication with Cuevas, the Mexican Minister of Foreign Affairs, 
and made the same demands that had been made by Bazoche in 
March. The failure of Cuevas to give proper guarantees that the 
demands would be granted or considered led to the sending of an 
ultimatum by Baudin on November 21, in which he stated that 
if the demands were not granted by the 27th he would begin hos- 
tilities by an attack on the castle San Juan de Ulua. No ade- 
quate response was made, and on the day set San Juan de Ulua 
was bombarded, and although the Mexicans considered it impreg- 
nable, it was captured after a few hours bombardment. The 
French took possession the following day, promising to restore 
the fortress as soon as all differences were adjusted. The com- 
mander of the Mexican forces agreed to reduce the garrison of 
Vera Cruz to one thousand men, and to receive back and indemnify 
the expelled Frenchmen. The French on their part agreed to 
lift the blockade for eight months. 

The ]\Iexican cabinet refused to confirm the agreement of the 
commander of the forces at Vera Cruz and prepared for fighting. 
This led to a battle at Vera Cruz early in December, when the 
Mexicans under the command of Santa Anna were severely de- 
feated. Shortly after this the British minister offered his services 
to mediate the difficulty, and both sides accepted. This resulted 
in the signing of a treaty on March 9, 1839, by which the Mexi- 
cans agreed to everything demanded by the French.^ San Juan 
de Ulua was restored on April 7, and the French fleet retired.* 

These conditions, as I have said, were known to Lamar and in- 
fluenced him to send a peace commissioner to treat with the Mexi- 
can authorities. Besides, Lamar and his cabinet had heard that 
Santa Anna was again at the head of the government in Mexico. 

'Rives, United States and Mexico, 1821-lSJi8, I, 435. 
'Dublan and Lozano, Legislacion Mexicano, III, 617. 
•Bancroft, History of Mexico, V, 204. 



Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Administration 135 

probably because he was appointed to the command of the army 
at Vera Cruz, and they considered that as favorable to Texas. It 
will be recalled that Santa Anna, while a prisoner in Texas after 
the battle of San Jacinto, entered into a secret treaty with the 
Texan authorities by which he agreed not to take up arms against 
Texas during the war for independence; that he would prepare 
the cabinet in Mexico for the favorable reception of a minister 
when Texas saw fit to send one; and that a treaty of amity, com- 
merce, and limits should be agreed to, the limits of Texas not to 
extend beyond the Eio Grande.^" It is apparent that this belief 
also influenced Lamar to send the mission. 

The information that several towns in the north had declared 
for the federahst system was contained in a letter dated December 
17, 1838, from Canales, a federalist leader, who prophesied that 
within a short time the whole republic would come over to the 
Federalist party. 

The information that Santa Anna was at the head of the gov- 
ernment as a supporter of the Federalist party was contained in 
the letter of Plummer, referred to above. It was this letter that 
determined Lamar to send immediately an envoy to Mexico, and 
he considered it of enough importance to send his secretary of 
state Barnard E. Bee. Bee had been intended for appoirtment 
as minister to the United States, and had been instructed to get 
in touch with the minister from IMexico and attempt to form a 
treaty of peace through him; at the same time he was to seek the 
mediation of the United States. When it was decided to send 
Bee to Mexico, Eichard G. Dunlap was sent as minister to the 
United States with the same instructions as were given to Bee. 
Both were to do everything in their power to come to an agree- 
ment with Mexico.''^ 

Bee was given two commissions, one as minister plenipotentiary 
to be used in case he was received by the Mexican government, and 
one as agent in case he was not received. He was given full pow- 
ers to negotiate for peace, and sign a treaty securing it, but he 
wa? to require the unconditional recognition of the independence 
of Texas, and was to admit no limits less than those prescribed 
by the act of Congress of December 19, 1836, which provided that 

'"Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex, IT, 434; .VtZes Register, LXTX, 98. 
"Webb to Dunlap. ]\[arch 13 and 14, 1839, Garrison. Dip. Cor. Tex., I, 
368-378. 



136 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 

the Eio Grande to its source was the boundary between Texas and 
Mexico. If Mexico was willing to establish peace and recognize 
the original boundaries of Texas — which included only to the 
Kueces — he was empowered to propose a compromise by offering 
to purchase all included between the original boundary and the 
Eio Grande at a sum not exceeding five million dollars. ^^ 

The commission and instructions to Bee were dated February 
20, 1839, but for some reason he did not get away from Texas 
until April 1. He then went to Mobile, where he hoped to secure 
passage to Vera Cruz. Failing there he proceeded to New Orleans, 
where he got into communication with James Hamilton, Loan Com- 
missioner of the Republic of Texas, and with a Mr. Gordon of 
the house of Lizardi and Company, the chief holders of Mexican 
bonds. It was probably here that the idea was conceived to use 
the indemnity which Texas offered Mexico for recognition to re- 
deem the Mexican bonds held by English investors. Bee remained 
in New Orleans until May 2, when he embarked for Vera Cruz, 
arriving there on May 8. 

This was the most inauspicious time that could have been chosen 
to arrive in TMexico with such an object. The difficulties with 
France, which had been counted upon to expedite negotiations, had 
been settled and the French fleet had sailed away a month before. 
Besides, with the withdrawal of the French the authorities had 
been able to give some attention to the Federalist risings, and one 
of the most formidable— that of Tampico— had been put down by 
Santa Anna and Urrea had been captured. Santa Anna was tem- 
porarily in charge of the executive office while Bustamante was 
absent in the north on a campaign against the Federalists there, 
and certainly nothing could be hoped for from him. So, while 
Bee set forth on his mission with high hopes, he arrived when an 
entirely new situation had developed, and there was no chance of 
success. 

While remaining on board the schooner Woodbury at Vera Cruz 
he communicated with various officials requesting that he be al- 
lowed to go to Mexico City to lay his case before the Council. 
This was peremptorily refused, if he had come to treat for inde- 
pendence. He was informed by General Victoria, the commandant 
at Vera Cruz, who had acted as the agent of the government in 

"Webb to Bee, February 20, 1839, Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., IT, 434. 



Foreign Affairs During fMmars Adminv^tration 137 

communicalhi^ with Bee. that tlie French question was settled, the 
Federalists put down, that reform was about to take place, and 
that with the great resources at her command ]\[exico would be 
forced to wage an efficient war on Texas in order to bring her 
back into the fold — all this in urging that Texas come back to 
her allegiance to Mexico. Failing to interest the Mexican authori- 
ties in his mission, and receiving threatening letters from several 
of the people of Vera Cruz, Bee took refuge on the French frigate 
Phaeton on May 28, and wrote letters to several members of the 
cabinet suggesting that negotiations for peace and recognition be 
held in Washington.^ ^ 

While Bee was still waiting at Vera Cruz to hear from Mexico 
City as to the possibility of his reception, Pakenham, British min- 
ister in Mexico, received a letter from Gordon in New Orleans, 
written April 29, 1839, stating the purposes of Bee's mission, and 
advising that Pakenham give assistance to his project. He stated 
that Bee was prepared to offer five million dollars for the land 
between the Nueces and the Eio Grande, and suggested that Mexico 
should satisfy the claims of English bondholders by locating lands 
for them within the disputed territory, accepting the five million 
dollars from Texas, and then agreeing to the line claimed by 
Texas. ^* Pakenham reported this plan to the Mexican authorities, 
but was informed that Bee had been rejected without hearing what 
he had to propose. 

Pakenham had been absent on leave in England in 1838, and in 
October, just before leaving for his return to Mexico, he had been 
insti-ucted by Palmerston to urge upon Mexico the importance of 
a prompt recognition of Texas. He now used the opportunity pre- 
sented by Gordon's suggestion and insisted upon the acceptance 
of that policy. He laid stress upon the advantage to Mexico of 
having a barrier state between her and the United States. Goro- 
stiza, the foreign minister, replied that he realized the value of 
such an arrangement, but that the IMexican government dared not 
risk so unpopular an act, and hinted that as a preliminary to ree- 
osrnition Mexico would welcome from England a suggestion of an 
armistice. With regard to the boundary desired by Texas, Goro- 
stiza said thnt Mexico would never consent to the claims of Texas. 

'"Lamar Papers, No. 1255. 

"Gordon to Pakenham, April 29, 1839; Adams. British Interests and 
Activities in Texas, 26. 



138 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 

''"Eeeonquei.-t is admitted to be impossible/' said Pakenham in re- 
porting the conversation to Palmerston, "and yet a feeling of mis- 
taken pride, foolislily called regard for the national honor, deters 
the government from putting an end to a state of things highly 
prejudicial to the interests of Texas and attended with no sort of 
advantage to this country."^'' 

Bee had left for his mission not over-sanguine as to its success, 
believing that Washington was the proper place to treat. After 
his failure to get in touch with the authorities in Mexico, he was 
naturally still convinced that he should have gone to Washington. 
He wrote just before leaving for Vera Cruz: "We made a merry 
move in coming so suddenly upon these people, the first plan was 
the true one. It ought to have opened at Washington."^ ^ He 
continued firm in the belief that with less publicity Mexico would 
be willing to come to terms. He was further convinced of this 
when, after his arrival in New Orleans, he received a letter from 
Almonte, Mexican secretary of war, stating that the President was 
willing for him to open his views to the government. At this 
point James Treat enters into the negotiations.^'' 

James Treat had lived in Mexico for a number of years, was 
well acquainted witli Santa Anna, and for some time had been in 
correspondence with the secret agent of the Mexican government in 
New Orleans. It was he who had outlined a scheme for pacifica- 
iion in December, 1838, and who had been recommended by James 
LI organ for a peace mission to Mexico. In the summer of 1839 
he became acquainted with James Hamilton,^® and on June 22 

"Pakenham to Palmerston, June 3, 1839, British Foreign Office, Mexico, 
125; Adams, British Interests and Activities in Texas, 27. 

'«Bee to Webb, May 28, 1839, Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., II, 449. 

"Bee to Webb, July G, 1839, Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., II, 456. 

"James Hamilton played such an important part in the history of 
Texas during this period that some notice of his activities is required. 
He was a native of South Carolina who had early become interested in 
Texas. He was a member of Congress from South Carolina from 1822 
to 1829, and governor of the state from 1829 to 1830, retiring when 
Hayne became governor. His first correspondence with Lamar was in 
June, 1836, when he wrote a letter of introduction for Barnard E. Bee, 
who was just then coming to Texas. From that time on he was a steady 
correspondent, and after Lamar was elected president in 1838 he wrote 
frequent and long letters giving his advice as to public policy, and 
probably more tlian anyone else he influenced Lamar's actions. Just before 
the close of Houston's administration an fll'ort had been made to secure 
the appoivitn'oiit of Hamilton as loan commissioner. Upon the refusal 
of Houston to ai>point him. Bee had resigned from the cabinet, probably 



Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Administration 139 

Hamilton wrote to Lamar advising that Treat be appointed to 
assist Bee in the negotiations in New Orleans. Without waiting 
for a reply, he took the liberty of sending Treat to New Orleans 
with instructions to assist Bee by getting into communication with 
the Mexican secret agent.^^ Before anything was done, however, 
Hamilton, acting on the advice of Poinsett, American secretary of 
war, advised that Treat be sent direct to Mexico City. This advice 
was acquiesced in by Bee, and Lamar decided to act upon the advice 
and send Treat as secret agent with full powers to negotiate a 
treaty.^" 

The instructions to Treat were in part a duplicate of those to 
Bee. The unconditional acknowledgment of the independence of 
Texas within the statutory boundaries was to be demanded as a 
sine qua nan-. The Texas authorities were now willing to go fur- 
ther in territorial claims, however, and Treat was instructed to 
propose as the boundary, a line commencing at the mouth of the 
Eio Grande and running midway of its channel to El Paso, and 
from that point due west to the Gulf of California, and along the 
.southern shore of that gulf to the Pacific Ocean. "This boundary 
will not be strenuously insisted upon," said the instructions, "but 
may be intimated as a counterpoise to any extravagant expectations 
on the part of Mexico and as a premonition to that government of 
the ultimate destination of that remote territory.'' He was author- 
ized to offer up to five million dollars for a recognition of the first 
claimed boundary, any part of which might be in Mexican bonds.'^^ 

Treat left Austin immediately upon receiving his instructions 
and proceeded to New Orleans, where he arrived on August 13, 
He left there two days later for New York, arriving on the 29th. 
Here he was detained for two months while waiting for transpor- 
tation and attempting to secure funds for the trip. He finally 
left New York in the latter part of October, and arrived, after a 

determininpr Lamar to appoint Bee as secretary of State. He visited 
Texas in March, 1839, and was appointed by Lamar as loan commissioner, 
and was sent to France and Enj^land to assist Henderson in securing 
recopfnition while negotiating: for a loan. He was sent on various diplo- 
matic missions after this, which will appear when T discuss the relations 
of Texas with Europe. 

'"Hamilton to Lamar, June 28. 18.39, Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex.. II, 453. 

=<'Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., II, 459, 466, 470. 

='Burnet to Treat, August 9, 1839, Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., II. 470. 



140 Miraheau Buonaparte Lamar 

long journey, at Vera Cruz on JSTovember 28. He reached Mexico 
City on December 11 and began his negotiations. 

The internal conditions in Mexico throughout the greater part 
of 1839 were unsettled. The Federalist movement, which had 
gained considerable strength in 1838, was still flourishing in Tam- 
pico and various parts of the north. With the French difficulties 
settled, the government decided to proceed with vigor against the 
insurgents under Urrea at Tampico, and Santa Anna, whose loss 
of a leg in the battle of Vera Cruz had restored him to favor with 
the populace, urged the president, Bustamante, to lead the expe- 
dition against them. Bustamante reluctantly agreed. The exec- 
utive authority would normally have fallen upon the vice-president, 
Nicolas Bravo, but the populace demanded Santa Anna, and Bravo 
gracefully stepped aside, and the Council appointed Santa Anna. 
Santa Anna assumed the executive power on March 18, 1839, and 
Bustamante set out for Tampico.'^- 

Bustamante traveled leisurely towards Tampico and allowed the 
insurgents to get between him and Mexico City. Santa Anna, 
who was in the capital, raised a force and advanced to meet them, 
and defeated them at Acajete on May 3, 1839. In June Tampico 
was taken. In July Bustamante returned to the capital and as- 
sumed the executive authority. As he had seen no fighting he 
was discredited and his government was weaker than ever. Santa 
Anna was the popular hero, but he did not consider that condi- 
tions were ripe for his return to power, so he retired to his ranch 
and left the control of affairs to Bustamante.^^ A complete re- 
organization of the cabinet took place, however. Juan de Dios 
Canedo succeeded Gorostiza as foreign minister, Luis Gonzales 
Cuevas became secretary of the interior, Xavier de Echeverria, 
secretary of the treasury, and J. N. Almonte, secretary of war.^* 

Be Pore proceeding with Treat's negotiations it will be necessary 
to notice the efforts of the Texan minister in Washington to nego- 
tiate with the Mexican minister, and also his efforts to secure the 
mediation of the United States. It will be remembered that Dun- 
lap had been instructed to treat if possible with the Mexican min- 

=='Bustamante, Cahinete Mexicana, I, 176; Rives, United States and Mex- 
ico, I, 450. 

-"Ibid., I, 451. 

"Treat to Burnet, (Enclosure) September 21, 1839, Garrison, Dip. Cor. 
Tex., II, 488. 



Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Administration 141 

ister in Washington, and if necessary he was to secure the medi- 
ation of the United States. To Dunlap's suggestion that the United 
States mediate between Texas and Mexico, Forsyth gave a half- 
hearted assent, and instructed Ellis, the new minister to Mexico, 
to be ready, while observing strict neutrality, to interpose his good 
offices between Mexico and Texas, but not until Mexico should ask 
for them,-^ The Mexican minister, Martinez, was made aware 
of the purposes of Dunlap, but it v/as not until October that the 
two ministers got together. During the second week of October 
they held several conferences, and Dunlap submitted to Martinez 
a formal request that negotiations be undertaken. The Mexican 
minister responded that he had no authority to enter into a treaty, 
but that he would send Dunlap's suggestions to his home govern- 
ment. This was the end of efforts to negotiate a treaty in this 
manner.-® 

Great Britain had, on her own initiative, taken some steps 
towards mediation before Treat's arrival in Mexico. As I have 
already stated, Palmerston had given verbal instructions to Paken- 
ham in October, 1838, urging the recognition of Texan indepen- 
dence, which instructions were submitted after Bee's failure. On 
April 25, 1839, Palmerston sent his first written instructions to 
Pakcnham on the subject of Texas. In this letter Palmerston 
argued at length as to the impossibility of a reconquest of Texas. 
In supplementary instructions enclosed in this letter, Palmerston 
said that it was not likely that Mexico would listen at once to the 
suggestion for recognition, but he did hope that she would be will- 
ing to accept the good offices of Great Britain.-^ Cafiedo had be- 
come foreign minister when these instructions were received, and 
to him Pakenham communicated the substance of them. Cafiedo 
responded tliat he realized the importance of the recognition of 
Texan independence, but that the government could not risk so 
unpopular an act. He stated that Mexico might welcome from 
Great Britain a suggestion for suspension of hostilities ; and Paken- 

-Forsyth to Ellis, May 3, 1839, MS., Archives. See also Reeves, 
American Diplomacy under Tyler and Polk, 87; Dunlap to Lamar, May 
16. 1839, Garrison. Dip. Cor. Tex., T. 383. 

-'Dunlap to Burnet. October 12, 1839, (Enclosing Martinez to Dunlap, 
October 8, 1839) Dip. Cor. Tex., I, 421-424. 

-'Adams. British Interests and Activities in Texas, 28-29 



142 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 

ham was convinced in September that such an arrangement could 
be made preparatory to pacification.-* 

From that time forward Pakenham was active in the interest 
of the recognition of Texas independence by Mexico. On Decem- 
ber 12, 1839, he addressed a letter to James Hamilton, who was 
about to set out on a diplomatic mission to Great Britain, in which 
he gave an account of his activities. After acknowledging a letter 
from Hamilton written November 18, he said: 

It is some time since I received from Viscount Palmerston In- 
structions to tender the good offices of Her Majesty's Government 
towards effecting an arrangement between this Country and Texas ; 
but I regret lo say that all my exertions to induce this Government 
to entertain the question of recognition have hitherto proved un- 
availing. Not but that the more enlightened Members of the pres- 
ent Administration appear to understand that to continue the con- 
test with Texas would be worse than useless, but there is no man 
among them bold enough to confront the popular opinion, or, I 
should rather say the popular prejudice upon this point, which is 
strongly pronounced against any accommodation with Texas. Be- 
sides which they fear, and not without reason, that, for the sake 
of Party objects, an attempt would dishonestly be made to crush 
by the unpopularity which would, very certainly, attend such a 
measure, any Government which should be bold enough to advocate 
the policy of alienating what is still talked of as a part of the 
National Territory. 

Under these circumstances it appeared to me that the next best 
thing to propose was a mutual suspension of hostilities as a pre- 
paratory step to the ulterior measure of absolute recognition at a 
future period. . . . 

Some time ago Senor Cafiedo, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, 
who, to speak the truth, strongly inclines to the course which wis- 
dom and sound policy recommend with regard to the question of 
Texas, informed me "that after repeated and arduous discussions 
with his Colleagues he had succeeded in obtaining their consent to 
place on the re'cords of their deliberations a minute to the effect 
that if Commissioners from Texas should present themselves, they 
would be listened to, with the distinct understanding, however, that 
no proposition for the alienation of the right of Sovereignty would 
be entertained. But as he would not take upon himself to put 
into mv hands any written communication to that effect, or even 
convev to me a more definite understanding of what his Govern- 
ment midit be disposed to accede to in the way of armistice, or 
otherwise, I did not think m.yself at liberty to recommend to 
Colonel Bee. with wIiouk on the occasion of his late Mission, I 

'^Ibid.. 32-33. 



Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Aclminisl ration 143 

had had some communication, to undertake a fresh journey to this 
countr}^ upon such vague and uncertain grounds. 

On receipt of your letter-" I again entered into communication 
with the Mexican Government upon the important subject to 
which it relates, but I am sorry to say, as far as regards the ques- 
tion of recognition, with no better success than before. Neverthe- 
less I have obtained from Senor Cafiedo a written communication, 
. . . stating that this Government are disposed to listen to pro- 
posals from the Inhabitants of Texas ; but that on no account will 
they relinquish the right of Sovereignty over that Territory.^'' 

Both the Bee mission and the Treat mission were undertaken by 
President Lamar without consulting Congress. On December 10, 
1839, however, he sent a special message to a secret session of Con- 
gress giving a full account of the proceedings so far, including 
the reasons for sending Bee, the causes of his failure, and the 
reasons for his sending a secret agent. He also mentioned the 
terms on which the agents were instructed to make peace.^^ As 
a result of this, Congress passed a joint resolution endorsing his 
acts, as follows: 

1. Congress views with entire approbation the present policy 
of the Executive. 

2. [Boundary as in the Act of December 19, 1836.] 

3. That should such a Treaty be passed between the Commis- 
sioner on the part of the Government of Texas and Mexico, and 

-"Written November 18 and received December 4, 1839. Hamilton had" 
])ro])osed that Mexico acknowledjre the independence of Texas and receive 
from Texas the sum of five million dollars. Avith the understanding that 
the money go directly into the pockets of the bondholders. The bon^T- 
holders Av'ere then to release the lands that had already been granted to 
them by the government of ^Mexico. He aLso informed Pakenham that 
Treat was on his way to IMexico. but suggested that peace negotiations be- 
begun in London, so that the Mexican bondholders could be present and 
look a.fter their interests. — Adams. British Interests and Activities in 
Texas, .37. 

'"'Pakenham to Hamilton, December 12, 1839, (Copy enclosed in Hamil- 
ton to Burnet, January .5, 1840) Dip. Cor. Tex., Ill, 879-880. 

Pakenhara enclosed a copy of the written communication by Caiiedo, the 
important part of which was as follows: "V. E. se sirve manifestarme 
su deseo de saler si por se ha tomado por este Gobierno alguna resolucion 
en virtud de las propuestas amistosas que en cumplimiento de sus citidas 
instrucciones ha hacho; y en contestacion tengo la honra de decirle que los 
Commissionados de los habitantes de Texas seran oydos por el Gobierno 
Mexieano, bajo la condicion indispensable de que este no ha de desistir 
de la Soberania nacional sobre aquel Departamento de la Republica." — 
Dip. Cor. Tex., II, 505. 

^'Winkler, (^itor, f^eeret Jovrnals of the tSenate of the Republic of 
Texas. 148. 



144 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 

after the same may have been ratified and confirmed by the Presi- 
dent and Senate of this Republic, our Commissioners of loans in 
Europe are authorized to borrow the amount which may be stip- 
ulated in said Treaty, at an interest not exceeding six per cent. 
4. Be it further resolved, That the said Commissioners ap- 
pointed on the part of Texas shall if practicable procure the Guar- 
anty of Great Britain for the faithful performance of the Treaty 
by both parties.^'^ 

One of the first things that Treat had to report after arriving 
in Mexico was the promulgation of a proclamation by the Presi- 
dent announcing the renewal of hostilities with Texas, and the 
consideration by Congress of ways and means for financing a mili- 
tary campaign.^^ In fact, A. S. Wright, a secret correspondent 
of the Texan government was convinced that Mexico was making 
preparations to invade Texas and kept the Texan authorities in- 
formed for some months before Treat arrived.^* Public or polit- 
ical sentiment would prol)ably have demanded some effort to sub- 
due Texas at any rate; but the news that Texans had joined with 
the insurgent Federalists on the Rio Grande led to the proclama- 
tion of a renewal of the war, and special efforts to secure action 
by Congress in support of the campaign.'^ 

The Texan authorities had shown a marked partiality for the 
Federalists, partly because they were fighting for the same prin- 
ciples for which the Texans had fought in 1835 and 1836, but 
chiefly because they felt that the Federalists would regard with 
more favor the claims of Texas to independence. On December 
17, 1838, the Licentiate Antonio Canales, commander of the Third 
Division of the Federal army, wrote a letter to Lamar announcing 
the capture of several towns by the Federalists.^^ In this letter he 
addressed Lamar as "President of the Republic of Texas," which 
was thereafter cited as an indication that the Federalists recog- 
nized the claims of Texas in advance of their success in the revo- 
lution. As a result of the friendly feeling engendered by this 
letter. Congress passed a joint resolution providing for the open- 

^Ihid., 16G. 

^rent to Burnet, November 29, 1839, Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., II, .501. 

="\Vriglit to Bee, August 29 to November 18, 1839, in Ihicl. G 15-632. 

^'VVright to Bryan, November 21, 1839. in Ibid., II, 496. 

=»°Canales to Lamar. December 17, 1838, in Ibid., II, 430. 



Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Adminvitration 145 

ing of trade with the Rio Grande settlements, and the President 
issued his proclamation to that effect in February, 1839.-" 

In the spring of 1839 General Anaya, later put to death after 
the capture of Tampico in June, 1839, who was looked upon as 
the chief of the Federalist party, visited Texas and promised the 
Texan authorities that if they would allow him to transport troops 
across Texas and raise troops m Texas, he would, in case of success, 
recognize their independence. This permission was refused. Later 
the Federalists of the northern states sent Francisco Vidaurri, 
governor of Coahuila, to make overtures for an alliance between 
Texas and the states of Nuevo Leon, Tamaulipas, Coahuila, Chi- 
huahua, New Mexico, Durango, and the Californias.^® In spite 
of the strong sentiment in favor of such an alliance, the authori- 
ties refused to entertain the idea. 

After the overthrow of the insurgents in Tampico in June, Gen- 
eral Canales, Colonels Jose Maria Gonzales, and Antonio Zapata 
with a small force fled to Lipantitlan on the Nueces river. Here 
Canales issued a proclamation inviting the Texans to join him, 
promising them an equal division of the spoils, twenty-five dollars 
per month, and a half league of land to those who should serve 
during the war.^^ Though the government had refused to join 
Canales, about one hundred and eighty Texans under Colonels 
Reuben Ross and S. W. Jordan joined the Federalists. On Sep- 
tember 30, 1839, the Federalist forces, consisting now of six hun- 
dred men, crossed the Rio Grande and marched against Guerrero, 
whJL'h was held by General Pavon with five hundred regulars and 
four pieces of artillery. Pavon retreated toward Mier and was 
followed by Canales. On October 3 was fought the battle of 
Alcantro, in which the Texans distinguished themselves by over- 
whelmingly defeating the enemy. This was the battle which 
caused the preparations for an active campaign against Texas.*" 

The Texans continued their operations in connection with Ca- 
nales and the Federalists, participating in January, 1840, in the 
creation of tlie "Republic of the Rio Grande." It is not my pur- 
pose, however, to follow their activities. The President had, while 

"Lamar Papers, No. 1079. 

^Bancroft. North Mexican fitates avd Texas, II, 327. 
^^hid; Yoakum, History of Texas, II. 274. 

"Bancroft. North Mexican States and Texas, II, 32S; Yoakum, History 
of Texas, II, 274. 



146 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 

treating their envoys with courtesy, refused to join the Federalists 
in their campaign against the central government. It is likely 
that he desired their success, as it would have made things better 
for Texas; but he did not trust the Mexicans. On December 21, 
1839, he issued a proclamation warning the citizens of Texas not 
to invade Mexico, and not to take part in any marauding expe- 
dition or other acts of hostility against Mexico, until a renewal of 
hostilities should be announced by public notice. He declared that 
any citizen who should invade Mexico, or by any hostile act molest 
its inhabitants within their own territory, should be considered 
without the protection of the Texan government, which disclaimed 
all participation in their conduct, and could afford no countenance 
to their unauthorized aets.*^ 

In his letter of November 29 from Vera Cruz Treat told of the 
impression created in Mexico by the Texan participation in the 
battle of Alcantro, but he dismissed the matter by saying the im- 
pression would blow over. Later in a letter to James Hamilton, 
a copy of which was sent to the Texas state department, he con- 
sidered it more serious than he had at first thought. With regard 
to this matter and the action of the Mexican government upon it, 
he wrote : 

. . . You will have seen that the movement of Eoss and his 
party, with other volunteers, to which they attribute the success of 
the Federalists, and the surrender of the troops in or near Mier, 
(some 600 men) have produced much excitement on the part of 
the Govmt as well as in the public mind. The Govmt. having 
taken all the measures in their power, have called on Congress for 
special powers to levy taxes to support the war against Texas, and 
to reunite that department to the national union, etc. etc. etc. Not 
satisfied with this measure initiated in Congress, and without wait- 
ing for the action of that body, another project of Law is sent 
down by the Secretary of War (Sr. Almonte) declaring it treason 
against the state for any one "to write act or speak in favour of 
the views and intentions of the Texans; or in favour of the views 
of any foreign power having for its object to dismember the terri- 
tory of Mexico etc.*^ 

These two proposals were sent to a special committee by the 

"Austin City Gazette, January 1. 1840. 

"Treat to Hamilton, December 16, 1839, Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., II, 
508-509. Treat had a peculiar habit of underscoring, entirely without 
meaning, many words in his despatches. I shall ignore his italics, using 
them onlj^ when it seems that emphasis is intended. 



Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Administration 147 

Chamber of Deputies. The committee reported against granting 
special powers, but recommended proceeding with the expedition 
under the ordinary powers of the government. Instead of report- 
ing ways and means promptly, they recommended measures assess- 
ing taxes which could not be collected for three or four months.*' 
The Deputies refused to accept the report of the committee, and 
sent it back to them for revision.** On January 1, 1840, the 
President, in his annual message to Congress, expressed surprise 
at the recognition of Texan independence by France, and urged 
upon the Congress the necessity of passing the laws asked for the 
prosecution of the war. After praising the soldiers who were oper- 
ating against the Federalists in the north, he said: 

The Executive will not fail to use every effort in their power to 
secure our frontier by the recovery of the territory of Texas, 
usurped by the ungrateful foreigners, to whom we gave a generous 
hospitality in that part of the Eepublic. 

On the 18th June of last year, the Government presented to 
their Council the Bill which, with some modifications, they after- 
wards laid before the Chambers on the 26th November, demanding 
powers for making the necessary expenditure, and for carrying 
i''ito effect the political and military measures requisite for reunit- 
ing the Department of Texas to the National Union, which Bill 
is now before the Chamber of Deputies, as well as another, having 
for its object to declare traitors to their country such persons who, 
by act or writing favour the views of any foreign Power, or of the 
usurpers of Texas, for the purpose of dismembering or making 
themselves masters of the Mexican territory. The Executive Gov- 
ernment have the honor to recommend both these bills once more 
to your notice, hoping that you will take them into consideration, 
with the diligence and promptitude which the importance of their 
object requires of your patriotism.*^ 

Apparently this was an unfavorable situation for negotiation, 
and for the next month Treat did not reveal himself or the objects 
of his mission to the authorities. Still he did not believe that 
any serious efforts would be made to subjugate Texas. He thought 
that by asking for political and military powers, they desired to 
secure authority to raise an army and at the same time negotiate 
with the Texans. During the next month, however, he was busily 
engaged in working secretly against the granting of the extraor- 

*«Treat to Lamar, December 20, 1839, in Ibid., II, 513. 
"Treat to Lamar, December 31. 1839, in Ibid., II, 523. 
''■British and Foreign State Papers, XXIX, 1084 (Translation). 



148 Miraheau Buonaparte Lamar 

dinary powers. It was not until February 1, 1840, that he, through 
the intervention of Pakenham, had an interview with Canedo, 
minister for foreign affairs. 

Naturally, this first interview was introductory and nothing 
was accomplished. Canedo explained to Treat the difficulty he 
had had in persuading the President and other members of the 
cabinet to receive him at all, explaining that the intervention of 
Pakenham had been the determining factor. He had been finally 
authorized by the President to listen to all that Treat might have 
to say, without committing himself in return. When Caiiedo asked 
to see Treat's credentials it developed that he had no formal cre- 
dentials, but only the letter of instructions signed by Burnet. 
Canedo was willing to accept the letter as sufficient, but stated 
that the other members of the Government would not, and that 
it was necessary to secure proper credentials before proceeding. 
Tn the meantime, he was willing to accept the guarantee of Paken- 
ham that Treat was officially accredited. The proper credentials 
were dispatched on ^larch 12.*® 

On March 1, 1840, Treat got so far as submitting to Caiiedo 
the formal projet of a treaty, in accordance with his instructions.*'^ 
On April 15 he received his credentials. On the 18th he com- 
municated this fact to Canedo, and was informed that Caiiedo 
was in sympathy with his desires. Caiiedo also informed him as 
to the procedure he would advocate. The plan as outlined to 
Treat was as follows : A special cabinet meeting was to be held, 
when an effort would be made to pass the question along to the 
Council of the Government. If the Council recommended any 
action, the cabinet was to pass the matter along to the legislature 
for their action, where it was hoped that authorization would be 
given to treat with Texas.*^ 

This procedure was followed exactly. On May 5 the cabinet 
ordered that all the papers, documents, and correspondence be 
submitted to the "Council of Government" for their opinion, with 
the question : Whether the Council concurred with the cabinet in 
their resolution to ask Congress for special powers to negotiate an 
amicable arrangement with the Government of Texas.*^ The mat- 

"Treat to Lamar, February 1, 1S40, Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., II. 540, 
"Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., II. 592. 

«Treat to Lamar, April 21. 1840. Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., II, 606. 
^"Treat to Lamar, May 7, 1840. Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., II, 634. 



Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Administration 149 

ter went to the Council, which on IMay 12 voted down by a vote 
of five to four the unanimous recommendation of a committee of 
the Council that the views of the cabinet be adopted. This was 
due to the influence of Gorostiza, Treat thought, who was a friend 
of Santa Anna and an opponent of the existing government. He 
announced his purpose of attempting to secure the submission of 
the whole question to Congress without recommendation. "I think 
that my efforts," he wrote, 

and those of some friends will prove Successful, as I am assured 
that whatever may be the range and tenor of the report, it will be 
such as will Square with the Resolution that will be proposed, viz: 
To transmit the whole Subject, without expressing an opinion 
themselves, to the consideration of Congress. With this, and some 
other timely measures, I think I can expect the result promised.^** 

The papers were submitted to Congress on July 3 for discussion, 
but on the night of the 14th one of the periodical revolutions in 
the Capital broke out and prevented their consideration.^^ 

Lamar was becoming impatient at the delay in accomplishing 
any definite results. The threatening proclamations of the Cen- 
tralist commander in Coahuila, General Arista, and the manifest 
efforts of the Mexicans to stir up the Indians made it difficult for 
the Government to restrain public sentiment which demanded a 
coalition with the Federalists. On March 37 Treat had notified 
the Texan Government that he had formally laid before the Mexi- 
can Government a proposal for peace. In response to that letter, 
May 7, 1840, the Texas secretary of state, Abner S. Lipscomb, 
wrote as follows: 

The President has directed me to instruct you, that if after the 
reception of your credentials, you can obtain no decisively favor- 
able answer to your overtures for peace, that you will withdraw 
from your Agency. Should this be the result, you are instructed 
to make known to" the INTinister of Pier Britanic Majesty in Mexico, 
that should this Government be constrained to change its position 
and commence offensive operations, it will not be with a view of 
extending our territorv, bevond the Fdo Grande and any occupa- 
tion or militarv movement west of that River, will be temporary 
and r-olely with the view of forcing the enemy to make peace.^* 

'^Ihid. to Ihid., May 28. 1840. Ihrd.. TT. 636. 

"7&irf.. II, 669; 670. 

"Lipscomb to Treat, IMay 7. 1840. Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., II, 635. 



150 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 

In June Lamar determined to send the Texas navy on a cruise 
m the Gulf. This was due to the threat of a blockade of the ports 
of Texas by the Mexicans, who were supposed to have secured a 
navy in England, to the desire of Lamar to establish communica- 
tions with the Federalists of Yucatan and Tabasco, who had seem- 
ingly made good their secession from Mexico, and to communicate 
with Treat, who was expected to have completed his mission by 
that time. The commander of the navy, E. W. Moore, was in- 
structed to proceed to some safe anchorage off Vera Cruz and 
send in the dispatches for Pakenham. He was to cause one of 
his vessels to stand off Point Maria-Andrea for thirteen days to 
receive any communication that might be sent by Treat. If he 
should receive notice that Treat had failed in his mission, he was 
instructed to cruise against the Mexican vessels and make prizes 
of them. He was not to commence hostilities until Treat had 
notified him of the failure of negotiations, but if attacked, he was 
to defend himself. Finally, he was to endeavor to ascertain the 
condition of the state of Yucatan, and the disposition of the func- 
tionaries administering the Government, "whether friendly or 
otherwise to us, any manifestation of friendship from them you 
will reciprocate."-'^^ 

With Moore went a letter to Treat from the secretary of state 
in which he again called attention to the conduct of the Mexicans 
on the frontier and denounced the conspiracies of the Mexicans 
with the Indians. Lipscomb instructed Treat to inform the Texan 
Government as to the length of time necessary to come to some 
conclusion. He was also to inform the Mexican Government that 
Texas had about reached a decision to begin hostilities if no treaty 
were possible. "It would perhaps," he wrote, 

be well for you to urge upon Mexico the moderation of this Gov- 
prnment in not co-operating (thus far) with the Federalists on 
the Hio Grande as she has been strongly urged to do, and might 
have done with great benefit to herself and detriment to Mexico, 
that it is a forbearance we cannot practice much longer, lest we 
loose all the advantages which such a co-operation would give us, 
without gaining any thing from the Central Government of Mexico. 
The Federalists are still sanguine of Success, and unremitting in 
their overtures to us, to make a Common Cause in making war on 

"Lamar to Mix>re, June 20. 1840. Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., II, 651-652. 



Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Administration 151 

the Centralists, and in return, would grant every thing we could 
reasonably ask of them.'"* 

This letter did not reach Treat until August 13. He had al- 
ready, after the revolution in the Capital in July, communicated 
to the foreign minister Lamar's instructions of May 7, stating that 
he was under the necessity of hastening negotiations, and receiving 
a promise of immediate consideration from Cafiedo. On August 
21 he communicated a long memorandum in which he called at- 
tention to the various complaints against Mexico, and urged an 
immediate consideration of his mission. This receiving no con- 
sideration, on September 5 he addressed another letter to the sec- 
retary of foreign affairs, stating that if some official or formal 
assurance of the final determination of the Government with re- 
gard to his mission by the 18th, "which may satisfy him of the 
actual intentions of the Government to enter forthwith upon an 
amicable Negotiation" were not received, he would be compelled 
to ask for his passports and withdraw from his mission.^^ 

Eeceiving no response of any kind to this memorandum. Treat 
on September 21 addressed a note to Cafiedo requesting his pass- 
ports. While waiting for his passports, Pakenham suggested to 
Canedo that the only way to avoid a conflict with Texas was to 
arrange an armistice. Canedo agreed that if Treat had authority 
to agree to an armistice, Ms Government would receive his pro- 
posals and act promptly upon them, or, at least, so Pakenham 
understood. Treat agreed to receive any proposals the Mexican 
Government might offer. He did, however, draw up a draft of 
an armistice which he authorized Pakenham to put before the 
Mexican Government. The plan called for a cessation of hos- 
tilities for three or four years, and six months notice were to be 
given before renewing hostilities. The virtual recognition of the 
Rio Grande as a boundary was contained in an article requiring 
any Mexican forces to the east of the river to pass to the other 
side.^* On September 29 Canedo sent Treat's passports by Paken- 
ham without mentioning the matter of the armistice, and Canedo 
quit office the following day. Almonte, the strong man of the 
cabinet, assured Pakenham that he favored an armistice and would 

"Lipscomb to Treat, June 13. 1840. Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., II, 645. 
"Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., II. 675; 688; 700. 

"Treat to Lipscomb. September 29, 1840. Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., II, 
705, 707, 708. 



153 Miraheau Buonaparte Lamar 

use his influence to bring it about, so Treat determined to wait 
eight days longer before leaving the country. 

On October 15, 1840, Pakenham informed Treat that the Mexi- 
can Government refused to entertain any proposal for an armistice 
which should not be presented with the previous sanction of the 
Texan authorities; and that in no case could they consent to a 
provisional line of demarcation to the south of the San Antonio 
river. Pakenham stated that he had reluctantly come to the con- 
clusion that nothing could be gained by further overtures to the 
Government."'^ On account of ill health Treat was forced to re- 
main in Mexico until some time in November, when he embarked 
on one of the Texan vessels for Galveston. He had been in bad 
health at various times during his stay in Mexico, and was handi- 
capped m his negotiations on that account. He died on his way 
to Texas on board ship, November 30, 1840, so we do not have 
the benefit of his official report summing up the results of his 
mission, or giving suggestions for the future conduct of Texas. 
His reports to the Texas authorities were full, however, and make 
plain the chief Mexican traits of double dealing and procrastina- 
tion. The following letter from Pakenham to Treat on the eve 
of his departure for Texas gives a summary from an impartial 
v/itness of the main facts connected with Treat's mission : 

The Passport issued in conformity with your request accom- 
panied Senor (Dahedo's note ; but you will perceive that he declines 
to enter into the explanation solicited by you respecting the trans- 
actions connected with your Mission, the fruitless issue of which 
he attributes to your not having confined your propositions to the 
basis originally put forth by this Government viz: "That Mexico 
would not consent to relinquish the sovereignty of the Territory 
of Texas." 

It is true that in Senor Canedo's letter of the 11th. Deer. 1839, 
a copy of which I transmitted at the time to Gen. Hamilton, and 
of the contents of which you are also informed, the non-alienation 
of sovereignty was stated to be an indispensable condition to any 
arrangement: but it is no less true that the introductory propo- 
sitions, presented by you on the 23rd. March last, went directly 
to solicit the recognition of the independence of Texas, with such 
boundaries as might hereafter be agreed upon — that this propo- 
sition, so far from having been at once rejected by the Mexican 
GovcT-nment as inadmissable, was referred to the Council of State, 
where the whole question with regard to Texas was made the sub- 

"Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., 726. 



Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Admin is t ration 153 

jeet of more than one anxious discussion — and finally that in 
conformity with the resolution of the Council the correspondence 
which had })assed between Senor Canedo and myself, relative to 
your Mission and the proposition presented by you, were submitted 
to the consideration of the Congress, where, however, the matter 
appears to have remained altogether unnoticed. 

It is therefore certain that the propositions submitted by you, 
although not confined to the basis originally announced by Senor 
Caiiedo, were to all intents and purposes entertained by the Execu- 
tive branch of the Government, and not, as Senor Canedo would 
wish to have it inferred, rejected in limine because they went be- 
yond the basis at first propounded by the Mexican Government.^^ 

The news of the failure of Treat's mission came early in De- 
cember, and President Lamar recommended to Congress the pro- 
vision for a force sufficient to compel Mexico to acknowledge the 
independence of Texas. In the House a resolution was passed 
instructing the committee on military affairs to inquire into 
the expediency of authorizing the President to raise and equip 
five thousand men to invade Mexico and compel her to recognize 
independence. The men were to equip themselves and to have the 
spoils which they might take, and each was to be entitled to a 
league and labor of land, and further pay in land which might be 
taken on the west side of the Rio Grande.^^ On December 5 the 
Senate sent word that they had appointed a committee to act with 
the House committee to consider th; expediency of a war with 
Mexico. 

At this juncture President Lamar became seriously ill, and on 
December 12 he petitioned Congress for and received leave of 
absence to go to New Orleans for treatment. David G. Burnet, 
the Vice-President, became Acting-President, and continued to 
urge preparations for an offensive against Mexico. On December 
19 he sent to Congress the information that Treat had died on 
his way to Texas, and that the mission had failed. In spite of the 
efforts of Burnet to secure the co-operation of Congress, nothing 
was done save to authorize the employing of three companies of 
spies.^" On January 13, 1841, a select committee of the House 
brought in a report pointing out the poverty of the Republic, and 
advising against offensive war against Mexico. At the same time, 

''Ibid., II, 724. 

»»5 Tex. Cong., 1 Sess., House Journal, 181-182. 

'°5 Tex. Cong., 1 Sess., House Journal. 347. 



154 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 

they advised that Texas be put in a state of defense against in- 
vasion'.*'^ The whole matter ended by the two Houses failing to 
agree on the appropriation bill for the regular army, so even that 
instrument of defense was left without means of support, and was 
shortly after disbanded. 

About the time Treat began Ins negotiations in Mexico, James 
Hamilton, who had already been in Europe on a mission for Texas, 
was appointed a commissioner to secure a loan of five million dol- 
lars in Europe. He was to miss no opportunity of securing pa- 
cification with Mexico, and w^as authorized to enter into any treaty 
of amity, commerce and boundaries with Mexico, using money 
already agreed upon by Congress and the President in settlement 
of the claims of Mexican bondholders, with whom he was empow- 
ered to enter into an agreement. After numerous delays Hamilton 
arrived in London on September 27, 1840. He found no pos- 
sible chance of treating with Mexico at that place. On November 
13, 1840, he entered into a treaty of amity, commerce, and navi- 
gation with Great Britain, which carried with it recognition of 
Texan independence.'"'^ The following day he signed a convention 
providing for British mediation with Mexico. By this convention 
Texas agreed that if by means of the mediation of Great Britain, 
;an unlimited truce should be established between Mexico and Texas 
Tsathin thirty days after notice of the convention was communi- 
cated to Mexico, and if within six months thereafter Mexico should 
have concluded a treaty of peace with Texas, then the Republic 
of Texas w^ould take over five million dollars of Mexican bonds.®^ 

Tliese two treaties arrived in Texas and were communicated to 
the Senate on January 25, 1841, and promptlv ratified.^* As a 
result of this, hoping that a recognition of Texan independence by 
Great Britain and a formal convention providing for mediation 
would influence the attitude of the Mexican government, Lamar 
determined to send a third mission to Mexico, and this time his 
choice fell upon James Webb, who had succeeded Bee as secretary 
of state in February, 1839, and was at that time attorney-general. 
I-amar was absent from the seat of government when these treaties 
wore ratified, and while unsuccessful efl'orts were being made to 

"'Ibid., 47.3. 

'-Gammel, Laws of Texas, II, 880-885. 

""Ibid., II. 88G ; British and Foreign State Papers, XXIX, 84. 

^Secret Journals of the Senate, 195. 



Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Administration 155 

secure the authorization of a force for offensive operations against 
Mexico. He returned about the middle of February and imme- 
diately began making preparations for sending the mission. 

Webb's commission was dated March 22, 1841. Webb was ap- 
pointed a minister plenipotentiary, but in case he should not be 
received an alternative commission was prepared appointing him 
an agent for the purpose of entering into negotiations. The in- 
structions were similar to those of the preceding agents, the only 
dirference being a reference to the convention with Great Britain 
providing for mediation. A naval vessel was placed at his dis- 
posal, and he was to proceed at once to Vera Cruz, but if Mexico 
showed no indications that she wished to begin negotiations he 
was to terminate his mission at once.®^ The usual delay took place, 
and Webb did not arrive off Vera Cruz until May 31, when he 
addressed a note to the commandant at Vera Cruz asking permis- 
sion to land, and that he be furnished with passports to proceed 
to the city of Mexico. This request was courteously refused.®" 

Upon the refusal of the commandant to allow him to land, Webb 
addressed a note to Pakenham requesting his intervention with the 
Mexican authorities."'' Pakenham was so good as to comply with 
the request, and wrote to the secretary of state urging that an effort 
be made to come to agreement with the Texan authorities. The 
secretary of state responded on June 8, declining to consider any 
proposal which looked to the dismemberment of Mexico. Aftev 
expressing appreciation for the friendly interest of the British 
government, Camacho declared that the President could not de- 
part from the principles of honor and justice which prohibited 
him from recognizing a dismemberment of the territory."^ Webb 
returned to Gralveston June 29, and reported his failure to Lamar. 
Upon receipt of this information, Lamar took immediate steps to 
enter into an alliance with Yucatan in an offensive war against 
Mexico. 

"'Garrison. Dip. Cor. Tex., 733-736. 

'*Webb to Mora and Mora to Webb, May 31. 1841. Garrison. Dip. Cor. 
Tex., II, 752-753. 

"W'ebb to Pakenham, June 1, 1841, Ihid., II. 755. 

'^Camacho to Pakenham, June 8, 1841, (Translation) Dip. Cor. Tex., II, 
758. 



156 . Miraheau Buonaparte Lamar 

2. The Federalids and the Alliance with Yucatan 

The relations of the Texans with the Federalists on the Eio 
Grande, the battle of Alcantro, in which a number of Texans par- 
ticipated, and the proclamation of Lamar on December 21, 1839, 
warning Texans against participating with the Federalists against 
the Central Government have been noted. That the Government 
of Texas was really neutral, while perhaps sympathizing with the 
Federalists, there can be no doubt. In order to get the proclama- 
tion of neutrality to the Texans in the Federalist army, the assist- 
ant adjutant general, Colonel Benjamin 11. Johnson, accompanied 
by a small body of troops, was sent across the Eio Grande to the 
Federalist camp, and communicated the sentiments of the Gov- 
ernment to the Texans assembled there. On his return he was 
captured by a body of Mexicans, and he and his party were put 
to death. In spite of this, however, the Texan authorities refused 
to begin active hostilities. It was used as another count against 
Mexico, however, and given as an instance of the desire of Texas 
to avoid war. Writing to Treat in Mexico City regarding this 
incident, Burnet said : 

This is an event not calculated to assuage the feelings of a 
people already provoked by unwarranted and unchristian mas- 
sacres, or to soften the rigors of the war should it be actively re- 
newed. But inasmuch as this atrocity is reported to have been 
perpetrated by a desultory band of ruffiens without the express 
authority of the Government, the President will not regard it as 
an insuperable obstacle to the proposed negotiation. But it may 
be considered as an infallible assurance, that if hostilities are to 
continue, thoy will be conducted with increased animation by an 
indignant people who know Low to avenge a wrong which they 
would never commit.*^ 

Notwithstanding the public sentiment in favor of joint action 
with the Federalists, and the participation of a good number of 
Texans in their campaigns, the attitude of the Government re- 
mained perfectly correct. The experiences of the Texans who ig- 
nored the advice of their Government was ample justification for 
the Government's position.'" 

"Burnet to Treat, March 12, 1840, Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex.. II, 582. 

'"Yoakum, History of Texas, II, 288-299, and Bancroft, North Mexican 
States and Texas, TI, 326-332. give a full account of the "Republic of the 
Rio Grande," the Federalist campaigns of 1840, and their final betrayal of 
the Texans who were aiding them. I shall not follow in detail the cam- 



Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Administration 157 

The most successful of these liberal movements broke- out in 
Yucatan in May, 1839. The weakness of the Government of Mex- 
ico, and the remoteness of Yucatan from the capital, made it im- 
possible to take adequate steps to reduce her to submission. By 
the beginning of the following year the revolutionists were in com- 
plete control of Yucatan, and the movement had spread into To- 
basco and Campeche. Treat Icept his Government informed of 
the developments there as he learned of them, suggesting the pos- 
sibility of joint action by Texas and Yucatan in case of the failure 
of his mission. In June, 1840, Commodore Moore was sent with 
the fleet to carry dispatches to Treat. While he was to be careful 
to observe strict neutrality and not to attack any Mexican vessel 
unless he learned that Treat's mission had failed, he was to "en- 
deavour to ascertain the condition of the State of Yucatan, and 
the disposition of those functionaries administering their Govern- 
ment, whether friendly or otherwise to us, any manifestation of 
friendship from them you will reciprocate."^^ 

IMoore left Galveston in June, immediately after receiving his 
orders, and considering the most important of his instructions the 
discovery of the attitude of Yucatan, he dispatched the letters for 
Treat and Pakenluim in the schooner San Jacinto, while he con- 
tinued direct to Y^'ucatan, arriving at Sisal on July 31. He was 
received with every favor by the authorities. After a short time 
at Sisal he sailed to Campeche, where he found General Anaya 
and had a friendly conference with him. He returned to Sisal 
shortly after, and had an interview with the governor-elect, San 
tiago Mendez, who informed him that "he was anxious that the 
most friendly relations should be established at an early period, 
and assured me that the ports of the State of Yucatan were open 
to any Texan vessel. . . ."'^ On the same day that he reported 
these movements to the secretary of the navy, August 28, 1840, 
Moore addressed a letter to President Lamar in which he urged 
the policy of active warfare. He wrote in part as follows : 

paigns. The statement of Von Hoist that Lamar recognized the "Republic 
of the Rio Grande." is absurd. He allowed Canales an asylum in Texas 
when he was defeated, but he certainly did not recognize any claim of the 
Mexicans to territory east of the Rio Grande. 

"Lamar to Moore, June 20, 1840. Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., II, 6.52. 

'-'Moore to Secretary of the Navy, August 28, 1840, 5 Tex. Cong., 1 Sess., 
Appendix, 232-237, House Journal. 



158 Miraheau Buonaparte Lamar 

By reference to my report you will see the disposition of the 
Federalists of Yucatan towards the Government of Texas and 
their anxiety for the cooperation of our Naval force; the weight 
cf whichj thrown at this time on their side would, I feel confident, 
be the means of establishing the Federal Constitution throughout 
Mexico, when we would be acknowledged at once. 

The Centralists are allmost prostrate, and single handed with 
the means already at your Command [the Navy] you might, with- 
out the least prospect of being molested by them on the Frontier, 
dictate to, and no longer ask at their hands, that which they can 
be very soon made to feel is ours already, viz our perfect Inde- 
pendence of them: and in my humble opinion they will never 
acknowledge it until they are made to feel it. 

With the Navy manned as indifferently as it is, every Mexican 
can be captured that dare put to sea, and their whole Sea Coast 
be kept in a perfect state of fear and trembling; why then should 
we temporize any longer with them, when, if they had the power 
they would annihilate every male Inhabitant of Texas and spread 
devastation and ruin throughout our devoted Country, 

You may keep Treating with them until the expiration of your 
administration and will, in all probability leave for your successor, 
whoever he may be, to reap all the advantages of your efforts ; 
now is the time to push them for they never were so prostrate.'^ 

The fleet returned to Galveston in April, 1841.'* Before that 
Lamar had determined to send the third peace mission to Mexico, 
the details of which I have just related. That the possibility of 
an alliance with Yucatan in case of failure was already a part of 
his policy, is indicated by the alternative instructions to Webb. 
"If you are not permitted to open negotiations with the Govern- 
ment of Mexico," said the instructions, 

or having opened them, should find it necessary to discontinue 
them, without any beneficial results, vou will after notifying this 
Government of the fact be at liberty, to return by the way of 
Yucatan and ascertain what part the Government of that country 
would be willing to take in a war which Texas might be compelled 
to wage against Mexico. In doing this however it is only ex- 
pected that you will sound the people of Yucatan on the subject 
as you are not furnished with authority to enter into any treaty 
stipulations, but you may suggest to the authorities the propriety 
of sending an agent to this Government with full powers to treat 

"Moore to Lamar, August 28, 1840, Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., TI. 695. 

"For a full history of the cruise of the fleet in 1840-1841. and the activi- 
ties under the alliance with Yucatan, see Dienst "The Naw of the Republic 
of Texas," in The Quarterly, XIII, 18-43. 



Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Administration 159 

and you may give them assurances of our friendship and willing- 
ness to receive such an agent. . . ."^ 

In June, 1841, Yucatan, which had so far been fightmg for the- 
restoration of the Constitution of 1834, declared her independence 
£rom Mexico. Webb learned of this while waiting to be admitted 
to Mexico, and although an accident to his vessel prevented him 
from returning by way of Yucatan, yet he had learned enough to 
cause him to urge an immediate treaty of alliance and opening of 
hostilities with Mexico. "Let Texas enter into arrangements at- 
once, with Yucatan and Tobasco," he wrote, 

and each party mutually recognize the Independence of the other,, 
and then let them conjointly renew and prosecute the War untill 
the Central Government shall be forced into terms, or put down 
beyond the hope of resuscitation. In renewing the War conjointly 
with Yucatan and Tobasco, Texas would only be expected to 
furnish her Navy, — the whole of the land operations to be car- 
ried on by the Federalists, and by which means we would be saved 
the entire expense of keeping an army in the field. . . . 

The Federalists of Yucatan and Tobasco have now everything 
that is necessary to carry on the War successfully, but a Navy, and 
they want no assistance from us but such as the Navy would afford. 
Without a Navy they can make no effectual impression upon the 
Sea ports, and that is the most essential object to be obtained ; 
because it is through the sea ports and the revenue derived from 
their Commerce that the Government is sustained — take away 
that, and you cut off all their resources and render them hope- 
lessly imbecile. Hence the great anxiety of the Federalists tO' 
make terms Avith us, because they believe with our assistance in 
taking their ports, they can immediately bring the Central party 
down. . . J^ 

This letter was received on July 5, and on the seventh Samuel 
A. Roberts, acting secretary of state, wrote to Webb as follows: 

Your Communication . . . was received two days ago, and 
it. together with tho accompanying documents, was immediately 
laid before the President, and he considers the questions involved 
of such magnitude as to determine him to go at once in person to 
Galveston, where he can best determine what will, under all the 
Circumstances, be most proper to be done. He will accordingly 

"Mayficld to Webb, March 22. 1841. Garrison, Dip. Cor Tex., IT. 735. 
"Webb to Lamar. June 29, 1841. Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex.. TT. 764. 



160 Mirabeaii Buonaparte Lamar 

leave here in the morning, and will probably be not more than 
one day behind Mr. Moore on his arrival at GalvestonJ^ 

On July 20, 184-1, Lamar addressed a letter to the Governor of 
the State of Yucatan, and as there has been some question as to 
who took the initiative in the alliance, I shall quote the letter in 
full. It is as follows: 

In reading over the Correspondence of Commodore Moore while 
commanding the Texan squadron on its late Cruise in the Gulf 
of Mexico, I have experienced the most sincere and lively Grati- 
fication in discovering the many evidences it affords of the kind 
and friendly sentiments entertained by the Authorities of the 
State of Yucatan toward the Government and people of Texas; 
and I now beg leave to assure you sir, that every expression of 
friendship and regard which has been uttered in your State towards 
us is most cordially and sincerely reciprocated on our part. 

It has been my earnest desire to establish with the States of 
Yucatan, Tobasco and such others as may throw off the Yoke of 
Central despotism in Mexico, relations of amity and friendship, 
and to show the disposition of this Government to reciprocate in 
the fullest manner, every evidence of good will manifested by the 
Federalists of Mexico towards this country, I hereby have the 
pleasure of declaring to you, and of making known to your Citi- 
zens, that the Ports of Texas are open to the vessels and Com- 
merce of Y'ueatan upon the same terms as we extend to the most 
favored nations, and that this Govt, will require of its Citizens 
the faithful performance of all contracts, obligations, or compro- 
mises which they may enter into with the citizens and subjects 
of Yucatan. 

Should it be the desire of your Excellency and of the Congress 
of Yucatan to enter into more permanent and specific relations 
of Amity friendship and Commerce with the Government and 
people of Texas, I have only to assure you that we shall be happy 
to receive from you, an agent duly accredited for that purpose; 
and that we will l)e prepared to enter into such negotiations and 
arrangements with him, as will be mutually beneficial, and result 
in securing a full and complete acknowledgment of the respective 
rights of both Countries from those who are now our enemies.'^® 

The Governor of Yucatan, Miguel Barbachano, made a prompt 
response to this letter, and immediately sent a commissioner, Mar- 
tin Francisco Peraza, fully authorized to treat with Texas on all 

"Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., II, 766. 

"Lamar to Govornor of Yucatan, July 20, 1841, Garrison. Dip. Cor. Tex., 
II, 792. 



Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Administration 161 

points. Peraza with liis secretary, Donaciano Rejon, arrived in 
Austin on September H. On September IG he submitted a pro- 
posal to the Texan Goveinment, which with a slight amendment 
was the plan adopted. By this agreement Yucatan was to pay 
eight thousand dollars to the Texan authorities for the purpose 
of getting the fleet ready for sea, and eight thousand dollars per 
mouth so long as the government should deem it necessary for the 
squadron to remain in active service. All captures made by the 
Texan vessels were to jje taken into Texas ports for adjudication, 
and all captured by Yucatan vessels were to be taken into the 
ports of Yucatan. Peraza had suggested that the prizes be divided 
equally, but as the Texas navy was much stronger, and could be 
depended upon to do the greater part of the fighting, Lamar re- 
fused to grant that, and the arrangement was agreed to as stated.'" 
On September 18, 1841, Commodore Moore was ordered to fit 
and provision his ships for the sea. This required about two 
months, and on December 13 he sailed from Galveston under 
sealed orders. Outside of Galveston Bar he opened his secret or- 
ders and found that he was to sail direct for Sisal in the State 
of Yucatan, and to cooperate with the sea and land forces of 
Yucatan in checking any hostile action of Mexico, He was in- 
structed to capture Mexican towns and levy contributions; and 
for the purpose of compelling payment, he was authorized to de- 
stroy public works and edifices, and seize public property, taking 
care not to molest private property except in the execution of duty. 
It was hoped tliat these acts would "strike terror among the in- 
habitants, which may be very useful to us should it again be 
thought advisable to enter into negotiations for peace."^° 

Moore arrived in Sisal on January 8, 1842, and found to his 
disappointment that a convention had been signed between Yuca- 
tan and Mexico on December 28, 1841, the basis of which was a 
return of Yucatan to her allegiance to Mexico. He complained 
of the apparent breach of faith on the part of the Yucatan Gov- 
ernment, but was informed that no promise had been made by 

"For the provisions of the aorrecment see Moore, To fhf Pcnplf of Tcras, 
15-lfl. This agreement being in the nature of a militnry con\ention was 
not submitted to Congress, hence it is not to be found in a collcetion of 
treaties. 

'"Moore, To the People of Texas, 13-15. 



162 Mirahean Jhionaparfe Lamar 

Yucatan as to her action in that regard.^ ^ The Yucatan Govern- 
ment continued to pay the eight thousand dollars monthly, but 
on March 29, notice was served on Moore that the Yucatan Gov- 
ernment was willing for the squadron to retire. After a mild pro- 
test, Moore departed from the Yucatan coast in the latter part 
of April, and arrived in Galveston on May 1, 184:2.*'^ 

Lamar's term of office closed on December 12, the day before 
Moore sailed from Galveston, and Sam Houston began his second 
term in the presidency. Condemning without discrimination every- 
thing that Lamar did, Houston repudiated the contract with Yu- 
catan, and on December 15 issued orders for the return of the 
fleet to Galveston. From some peculiar cause this order did not 
reach Moore until March 10, when it was too late to accomplish 
its purpose. In a speech in the United States Senate, March 15, 
1854, in denunciation of Moore, Houston said with regard to the 
convention with Yucatan, "This was done without any authority 
or sanction of Congress or Senate of the Republic of Texas. It 
was a mere act of grace or will on the part of the President." 
This might be ansvfered by saying that Texas and Mexico were 
still technically at war, and it is hard to see how it was necessary 
for the President to submit a military convention to the consid- 
eration of Congress.^^ 

3. Relations with the United States 

It has been seen that Lamar had a definite policy towards Mex- 
ico; but it cannot be said that he had any specific policy towards 
the United States differing from that of his predecessor or suc- 
cessors. The first years of the republic of Texas were taken up 
with the importunings of the Texan agents for admission to the 
Ignited States, either as a state or a territory, or almost on any 
terms that the ITnited States might lay down, all of which the 
United States declined with little ceremony.- While it is prob- 
able that public sentiment with regard to annexation was not ma- 
terially changed in Texas when the offer of annexation was with- 
drawn in October, 1838, it is certain that at the time the new 
president approved the withdrawal of the offer, which, as he said, 

"Moore, To the People of Texas, 26-29. See also Rejon to Texan Secre- 
tary of State, January 18, 1842, Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., II, 799-802. 
'^Moore, To the People of Texas, 53-58. 
^^Cong. Globe, 33 Cong., 1 Sess., App., 1081. 



Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Administration 163 

he had never seen the benefit of. '-Notwithstanding the almost 
undivided voice of my fellow-citizens at one time in favor of the 
measure," said Lamar in his inaugural address in December, 1838, 

and notwithstanding the decision of the National Congress at its 
last session, inhibiting the chief magistrate from withdrawing the 
proposition at the Cabinet of Washington, yet still I have never 
been able mvsell' to perceive the policy of the desired connection, 
or discover in it any "advantage, either civil, political, or commer- 
cial, which could possibly result to Texas. But, on the contrary, 
a long train of consequences of the most appalling character and 
magnitude have never failed to present themselves whenever I 
have entertained the subject, and forced upon my mind the un- 
welcome conviction that the step once taken would produce a last- 
ing regret, and ultimately prove as disastrous to our liberty and 
hopes as the triumphant"^ sword of the enemy. And I say this 
from no irreverence to the character and institutions of my native 
country — whose welfare I have ever desired, and do still desire 
above my individual happiness — but a deep and abiding grati- 
tude to the people of Texas, as well as a fervent devotion to those 
sacred principles of government whose defence invited me to this 
country, compel me to say that, however strong may be my at- 
tachment to the parent land, the land of my adoption must claim 
my highest allegiance and affection. 

The key to this opposition is found in what follows. Texas 
would yield up the right of declaring war or making peace, of 
controlling the Indian tribes within her borders, of appropriating 
the public domain for the benefit of education, of levying her own 
taxes, regulating her own commerce, and forming her own alli- 
ances and treaties. Besides, as an independent republic, Texas 
would adopt free trade, and not be bound by the "thralldom of 
tariff restrictions" found in the United States. Concluding this 
phase of his address, he said : 

When I reflect upon these vast and momentous consequences, 
so fatal to liberty on the one hand, and so fraught with happiness 
and glory on the other, T cannot regard the annexation of Texas 
to the American Union in any other light than as the grave of all 
ber hopes of happiness and greatness; and if, contrary to the 
present aspect of affairs, the amalgamation shall ever hereafter 
take place, I shall feel tbat the bloofl of our martyred heroes had 
been shed in vain — that we had riven the chains of Mexican des- 
potism only to fetter our country with indissoluble bonds, and 
that a young republic just rising into high distinction among the 



161 Miraheau Buonaparte Lamar 

nations of the earth had been swallowed up and lost, like a proud 
bark in a devouring vortex.^* 

Allowing for his love for high sounding phrases, and for his 
justifiable objection to the termination of the existence of the re- 
public over which he had just come to preside as chief executive, 
it is perfectly obvious that Lamar was at that time strongly op- 
posed to annexation; and this opposition of the President, to- 
gether with the lack of interest in the question in the United 
States, caused the annexation question to lie dormant throughout 
Lamar's administration. With this out of the way the main 
things to interest the two countries were the settlement of the 
boundary, the border Indians, and commercial relations. 

The settlement of the boundary between Texas and the United 
States has been adequately treated elsewhere,^^ and I shall do no 
more than outline it here. The statutory boundary as claimed 
by Texas was the line as defined in the treaty of 1819 between 
the United States and Spain. The line had not been surveyed 
when Texas made good her independence and adopted this line 
as her eastern boundary. Naturally there was considerable con- 
fusion, especially on account of Indian incursions from the United 
States. A controversy was precipitated with the United States 
shortly after tlie beginning of Houston's administration by the 
passage of a law creating land ofBces, and including in their juris- 
diction a part of the territory claimed by the United States.^^ 
This law was inoperative, because the time when it should go into 
operation was not fixed. A supplementary act was passed June 
12 providing that the act should go into effect on October 1.^^ 
The possible incursions of Texans into land claimed by Arkansas 
brought a protest from the governor of Arkansas, which was 
taken up by the secretary of state of the United States, Forsyth, 
and presented to the charge d'affaires of Texas as a protest from 
the United States.^'' 

On the same day that the law was passed providing that the 
land offices should begin work on October 1, another law was 
passed providing for the appointment of commissioners to run the 

^Lamar Papers, No. 361; Senate Journal, 3 Tex. Cong., 1 Seas. 
*^Marshall, Western Boundary of the Louisiana Purchase. 206-241. 
'"December 22, 1836. Gammel, Laivs of Texas, I, 1276-1284. 
^Ubid., 1322-1326. 
''Forsyth to Catlett, June 17, 1837, Dip. Cor. Tex., I, 230. 



Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Administration 1G5 

boundary line.'*^ Before the Texan charge had received notice of 
this act, however, he had already urged the United States authori- 
ties to appoint a commissioner for running the boundary line.^° 
Without attempting to follow the negotiations in detail, it is suffi- 
cient to say that after long delay and the presentation of claims 
and counter claims the Texan minister, Memucan Hunt, on April 
28, 3838, signed a convention for running the boundary line.®^ 
Eatifications were not exchanged until October 12, so the carry- 
ing out the convention devolved on the Lamar administration.''^ 

There was delay on botli sides in appointing commissioners and 
providing for their needs, and it was not until August, 1839, that 
the joint commission met in New Orleans, when, on account of 
the prevalence of yellow fever, and the hostility of the border In- 
dians, the commissioners decided to postpone the beginning of the 
work until October 15. They did not assemble again until Novem- 
ber 12, when they went into camp at Green's Bluff on the Sabine 
about thirty-five miles from its mouth. They were joined by the 
Texan comm.issioner, ]\femucan Hunt, on January 20, 1840, but 
the Texans lacked instruments, so there was another delay in be- 
ginning. While waiting for instruments for the Texans the com- 
missioners with much difficulty came to a decision as to the method 
to be pursued under the Treaty of 1819 and the convention of 
1838. On May 21, 1840, the survey actually began, the Texans 
conceding that Sabine gulf should be considered a part of Sabine 
river, and consenting to the boundary along the western side 
of that stream.^^ Work was interrupted on June 3, and it was 
not until February 14, 1841, that the commissioners assembled 
to renew work, and not until June 24, 1841, that the work was 
completed. 

There was always an Indian question between the two govern- 
ments. After the recognition of Texan independence by the United 
States, the treaty of 1831 between the United States and Mexico 
was considered as binding on Texas and the United States. Period- 
ically the Texas government sent complaints to the United States 
that efforts were being made to stir up the United States Indians 

^'Gammel, Lmos of Texas, I, 1331. 

""Catlett to Anderson, June 17, 1837, Dip. Cor. Tex.. I, 229. 

"Hunt to Irion, April 28, 1838, Dip. Cor. Tex.. I, 325-326. 

"^Malloy, Treaties, Conventions, etc., II. 1779. 

°*Marshall, Western Boundanj of the Louisiana Purchase, 230-235. 



166 Miraheau Buonaparte Lamar 

to act with their neighbors in Texas, and as often the authorities 
of the United States responded, usually courteously, but some- 
times coolly, saying they would investigate, and always the re- 
sult of their investigation was to show that the Texan fears were 
without foundation. This procedure had its beginning in the 
summer of 1S3G, when Gaines was urged to send forces into Texas 
for the purpose of keeping the Indians quiet; and ever after that 
in case of a threat of Indian war, or after any atrocities committed 
by the Indians as individuals or in small groups, the customary 
complaint was registered, and the customary answer returned. 

The administration of Lamar was not different from any other 
period of the history of the republic in this respect, and an ade- 
quate discussion would require too full a consideration of the whole 
Indian question for the purposes of this paper. I shall touch on 
the Indian question only incidentally as I discuss the efforts on 
the part of Texas to abrogate the Treaty of 1831 and form a new 
treaty with the United States. 

On February 17, 1838, the comptroller of the treasury of the 
United States issued a circular, in part as follows: 

Eeferring to the circular from this oflBce, of the 2nd. instant, 
I have to communicate for your Government that, by information 
received from the Department of State, it appears the fifth and 
sixth articles of the treaty with Mexico are held obligatory on the 
Republic of Texas. It results, therefore, that the vessels and pro- 
ductions of the latter, being placed on equal footing in carrying 
on its commercial intercourse with the United States, are to be 
treated with reciprocal favour, and enjoy the like privileges and 
exemptions that are extended to the productions and vessels of 
Mexico.^* 

This order was communicated to the Texan secretary of state on 
March 23, and on the 26th was ansv/ered by John Birdsall, stating 
that 

While the undersigned assures Mr. La Branche of the earnest 
desire of this Republic to cultivate the most friendly intercourse 
with the United States, and especially upon those principles of 
equality and reciprocal favour which should always characterise 
the commercial relations of friendly States, he cannot yield his 
assent to the proposition that the commercial stipulations of the 
treaty with ]\rexico are obligatory upon the Government of this 
Eepublic. 

"Dip. Cor. Tex.. I, 313, 314. 



Foreign Affairs During Lamar s Administration 167 

The events of our devolution, the great changes in territorial 
and political organization incident to it, necessarily make the ap- 
plication of the treaty, to the new order of things, a question of 
mere expediancy addressed to the discretion and reciprocal in- 
terests of the two countries. 

Not doubting however that the measures of this Government 
will meet the expectations of the United States, in regard to the 
commercial intercourse between them, The undersigned will lay 
before the President who is yet absent, the note of Mr La Branche, 
and the accompanying Circular at the earliest opportunity after 
his return, in order that this Government may take the necessary 
action upon the subject."''^ 

That the arrangement proposed proved satisfactory to the Presi- 
dent is to be presumed, as there was no further correspondence 
on the matter. The reservation of Birdsall was natural as the 
Texan minister was at that time trying to secure a commercial 
treaty with the United States, and it would have been unwise to 
prejudice the case by acknowledging without reservation that the 
Mexican treaty was binding. Besides, the notice of the application 
of the treaty to Texan vessels came from the treasury department 
of the United States and did not represent a joint agreement 
between Texan agents and agents of the United States; and it 
might have been considered beneath the dignity of Texas to ac- 
cept this without reservation. This arrangement was put into 
effect without Texas ever conceding its binding nature, except 
when the United States was urged to restrain their Indians, and 
as there was no commercial treaty ever ratified between Texas and 
the United States, it continued to be the basis of trade between 
the two countries. 

Notwithstanding the Texan authorities had early attempted to 
form commercial treaties with European countries, it was not until 
early in 1841 that steps were taken looking to the establishment 
of commercial arrangements with the United States. On Feb- 
ruary 17, the secretary of state wrote to Barnard E. Bee, Texan 
charge d'affaires in Washington, announcing the receipt of a num- 
ber of communications from Washington in relation to the con- 
struction of the treaty between the United States and Mexico, and 
the obligations of the United States under that treaty to restrafn 
the border Indians from incursions into Texas. "The President 
instructs me to inform a'ou," he wrote, 

"'Ibid., 322. 



168 Miraheau Buonaparte Lamar 

that in all probability it will be the most advisable to defer for 
the present any further discussion of that subject: That you will 
avail yourself of the most favorable opportunity to suggest, to the 
Secretary of State of the United States the importance, and mu- 
tual advantages to be derived to the respective Governments by 
establishing more definitely our relations and intercourse by far- 
ther Treaty stipulations. Independent of the high commercial ad- 
vantages consequent upon reciprocal Treaty obligations, the civil 
and criminal administration of the laws of the respective Govern- 
ments would be very much facilitated by properly tempered regu- 
lations relative to fugitives from justice, and public defaulters.''® 

In December Lamar had obtained leave of absence on account of 
bad health, and at the time this letter was sent he was still away 
from the seat of government, convalescing at the home of Doctor 
Hoxie, at Independence, Texas, It seems that Mayfield had in- 
structions from him before suggesting a general treaty with the 
United States. Some time about March 1, 1841, Lamar returned 
to the seat of governm_ent and took up his duties, and on March 
22 Mayfield addressed another letter on the subject of negotiating 
a treaty.^' In announcing the return of Lamar to Austin and 
the resumption of his duties, Mayfield wrote: 

His views were known upon the subject of opening a negotia- 
tion with the Government of the United States: for forming a 
delinite treaty of x\mity, Commerce and Navigation; and embrac- 
ing such other subjects as may mutually interest both [NTations. 
It is the wish of the President that you should, without delay 
represent in the most respectful and urgent manner to the Gov- 
ernment of the United States the importance of an early Nego- 
tiation relative to the several objects contained in my former note, 
in which the several matters now under consideration and dis- 
cussion between the two Governments may be embraced, and defi- 
nitely adjusted upon principles of entire reciprocity. 

ISTo specific plan was proposed for the reason that it was hoped 
that the negotiations would be held in Texas, and Bee was urged 

'"Mayfield to Bee, February 17, 1841, Dip. Cor. Tex., II. 76. 

"It is necessary to correct a false impression that several of the histories 
of Texas give. Yoakum, Bancroft, Thrall, Crane, Lester, Goujre. and others 
state that Lamar retired from the presidency, and that throughout the re- 
mainder of his term the office was administered by Burnet. Gouge is par- 
ticularly caustic, referring to the financial and other failures, and saying 
Lamar did not have the courage to remain with his office after failure. 
Even a slight acquaintance with the newspapers and other records of the 
period should have made impossible this error. 



Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Adminidralion 1G9 

to request that they he held there :^^ though some of the argu- 
ment>5 Bee should advance for the beginning of negotiations were 
suggested, one of which was the settlement of the right of citizens 
of each country to carry their body servants with them when travel- 
ing in the country of the other. Another reason given was the 
necessity for coming to some agreement as to the meaning of the 
treaty of 1831 with regard to the control of the Indians. 

By the treaty between Mexico and the United States in 1831, 
it was agreed that each country should take upon itself the duty 
of restraining the Indians from crossing the boundary and attack- 
ing the citizens of the other, even to the point of using force. 
The term used was the prevention of "incursions." The Texan 
government and the government of the United States developed 
diametrically opposite vieAvs with regard to the interpretation of 
this treaty. The Texan authorities interpreted it to mean that 
the United States government would prevent the peaceful emi- 
gration of United States Indians into Texas, and even went so 
far as to demand that the United States prevent the immigrant 
Indians, such as the Cherokees, Caddoes, and others from taking 
any part in Mexican conspiracies, or even to send a force to assist 
in ejecting them from Texas. The attitude of the United States 
was that the treaty meant that the United States would prevent 
any hostile incursions into the territory of Texas, or if unable to 
prevent the incursion, she would remunerate the Texas citizens 
for any loss sustained at the hands of Indian marauders. 

The action of the United States government in sending mili- 
tary forces into Texas in the summer of 1836 with the ostensible 
purpose of keeping the Indians quiet, created a precedent on which 
the Texans attempted to act from this time forward. Every time 
an outbreak appeared imminent, the Texan authorities sent the 
documents proving the conspiracy, and requested some action. 
These documents were usually submitted to the secretary of war, 
who at this time was J. E. Poinsett, for investigation. The atti- 
tude of the United States government is expressed in a report of 
Poinsett to the secretary of state on July 18, 1839, after the Texan 
minister had laid before the secretary of state documents showing 
that the Mexicans were conspiring v/ith the Cherokees against the 
Texans.°^ Poinsett wrote: 

"^Mayfield to Bee, March 22. 1841, Dip. Cor. Tex., II, 77-78. 

•"I have discussed these Indian wars in Chapter IV, and shall not give 



170 Miraheau Buonaparte Lamar 

Having carefully examined the documents accompanying that 
communication [Mr. Dunlap's], I do not find any evidence of a 
disposition on the part of the Indians within the United States 
to make war upon the citizens of Texas. The letters of the Mex- 
ican authorities allude clearly to the Indians residing within the 
Texan territory; and the circular is addressed to chiefs who live 
without the limits of the United States."' 

This position does not appear to have had a formal answer until 
December 15, 184-0, when Bee in a letter to Forsyth called atten- 
tion to additional atrocities, and took issue with the position of 
Poinsett. He claimed that as the Cherokees, Kickapoos, Dela- 
wares, ChoctaM^s, Pottawatomies, Sha^wnees, and Caddoes had come 
to Texas from the United States without ever securing rights of 
settlement there, it was the duty of the United States to keep them 
quiet as well as those which still r-^mained in the United States. 
Besides, he said, the Indians in the United States mingled in- 
discriminately with their kindred in Texas, and participated in the 
atrocities M^hich were complained of. His contention was that the 
removal of any tribe of Indians into Texas without the permis- 
sion of the Texan authorities, did not affect the duties of the 
United States under the treaty."^ 

The response of Forsyth to this communication, January 23, 
1841, is what precipitated the demand of the Texan government 
for the abrogation of the treaty of 1831. He wrote that as usual 
with anything dealing with Indian affairs. Bee's communication 
had been submitted to the war department, and that as usual, the 
conclusion arrived at was, "that the Executive of the United States 
has no legal power to check or restrain by force the voluntary and 
peaceable migrations of Indians from the United States to any 
other country whatsoever." The sole object of the article in the 
treaty referred to, he said, was to make it the duty of the parties 
to do everything in their power towards preserving peace among 
the Indians on their frontiers, and preventing them from attack- 
ing the citizens of either party. He claimed that the United 
States had scrupulously carried out her part of the contract, and 

more here than the international aspect. The documents referred to here 
were those showing the conspiracy of 1839, resulting in the expulsion of 
the Cherokees from Texas. 

^'^Senatc Documents, 32 Cong., 2 Sess., No. 14, p. 42. 

^"'Ihid., 52. 



Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Administration 171 

stood ready to continue to do so in case of proof that any United 
States Indians were making marauding expeditions into Texas."^ 

The death of President Harrison prevented the Texan legation 
from submitting the request of its government for a treaty until 
April 23, 1841. On that date Nathaniel Amory, secretary of lega- 
tion, expressed verbally to Webster the desire of the Texan govern- 
ment to enter into a treaty covering the Indian question, com- 
merce, and other matters at issue between the two governments, 
and also expressing the desire that negotiations be held in Austin. 
To the last proposal Webster interposed a negative, though he was 
non-committal as to the necessity for a treaty.^"^ Before this in- 
terview took place a letter had gone forward on April 20, signed 
by the secretary of state, but apparently written by President 
Lamar, in which the whole Texan contention was defended strongly. 

An interesting phase of the arguments used in this communica- 
tion, which was characteristic of Lamar's methods, is the balanc- 
ing of the benefits to the United States of the fifth and sixth 
articles against the duties assimied by the United States under 
the thirty-third article.^"* I shall quote at some length from this 
document, without pointing out the fallacies, to give some idea of 
the methods employed by Ijamar. After mentioning the fact that 
the United States had seen fit in 1838 to adapt the treaty to Texas 
so far as commerce was concerned, and that Texas had acquiesced 
in that interpretation of international law, he continued : 

Under the Construction given by Mr. Forsyth to the 33rd article 
of the Treaty Texas would not be receiving an equivalent, for the 
sacrifices she sufl*ers in her revenues; by allowing Vessels belong- 
ing to the United States to enter our Ports free of Tonnage duty. 
To arrive at a fair interpretation of that instrument the whole 
should be construed by its several parts and articles, by which 
means its tnie spirit and intention may be more accurately de- 
fined. It will be found that concessions, and privileges are con- 
tained in many of its clauses and provisions in many of its articles 

""Ibid., 55. 

"'Amory to Mayfield, April 23. 1841. Dip. Cor. Tex.. T, 489. 

'""Articles 5 and 6 of the treaty provided for complete reciprocal tonnage 
and other local dues, and that the same duties should be charged whether 
the goods were brought in Mexican or American vessels. 

Article 33 provided "that the two contracting parties, shall by all means 
in their power maintain peace and harmony among the several Indian Na- 
tions who inhabit the land adjacent to the lines and rivers which form 
the boundaries of the two countries;" and it was stipulated that the nec- 
essary force would be employed to restrain all incursions on the part of 



172 Miraheau Buonaparte Lamar 

of which there cannot be found a sufficient guarantee or equivalent 
secured in the same article. This naturally arose from the rela- 
tive strength, commerce, and political condition of the contracting 
parties at the time of making the Treaty, as will be seen by refer- 
ence to the articles cited. 

The United States at the time had an extended commerce, and 
heavy Shipping. ]\Iexico on the contrary (and with but remote 
prospects of improvement) was limited in her commerce, and yet 
more in her shipping. The mutual guarantee then as to tonnage 
and other charges enumerated in the "5th and 6th" articles of the 
Treaty cannot be said to secure to Mexico an equivalent, as it was 
apparent and must for years Continue that the whole trade of 
Mexico with the United States upon the Gulf would be carried in 
American bottoms. 

On the other hand, the I'nited States was well established, with 
a strong standing army, an organized militia, and an overflowing 
treasury, and her contribution to this balanced document was a 
guarantee to protect Mexico from her Indian neighbors. But in- 
dependent ol; those considerations, the United States was bound 
upon principles of justice aside from any treaty stipulations upon 
the subject, to guard the government of Mexico, her citizens or 
territory, from hostilities or incursions from those various tribes 
of Indians, which by her policy she was establishing on the im- 
mediate borders of the latter. He did not agree with Forsyth's 
interpretation of the thirty-third article, and insisted that the 
United States was obligated to use force to restrain her Indians 
from making incursions, either peaceful or otherwise, into Texas, 
"Finally, since the United States refused to carry out the plain 
obligations of the thirty-third article, the minister was to announce 
to the American secretary of state that Texas had determined to 
terminate the stipulations of the fifth and sixth articles as pro- 
vided for by the treaty.^"^ These instructions were complied with 
on May 19, when the secretary of legation informed the American 
secretary of state that the treaty would terminate a year from that 
date.i*"' 

This elicited no response from the United States government, 
though there continued to be a one-sided correspondence on the 
subject thereafter. On September 15 Amory submitted a rough 
draft of a treaty as follows: 

the Indians living within their respective boundaries. Treaties and Con- 
ventions of the United States (Malloy, ed.), I, 1085-1097. 

"'Mayfield to Bee. April 20, 1841, Dip. Cor. Tex., II, 82-86. 

'""Amory to Webster, May 19, 1841, Dip. Cor. Tex., I, 496. 



Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Administration 173 

Article 1 : On commerce and navigation. To be nearly the 
same as that in the Treaty between Texas and Great Britain, or 
as the 2nd Article of the convention between Texas and the Nether- 
lands, 

2nd. Arte: As regards what shall be considered Texas vessels 
to be like the 7th Article of the Treaty between Texas and the 
Netherlands. 

3rd. Tonage duties the same on vessels of both countries as in 
the second Article of the Treaty with Great Britain. Insert pro- 
visions for calling upon justices of the Peace, Judges and courts 
for warrants and other process to apprehend deserters from the 
Commercial and Naval Service. 

4th The flag to protect the ships and goods, and no right of 
search to be permitted under penalty of damages to be restored by 
the (xovernment of the officer or officers offending. 

Artie 5th Provide for right and obligation of convoy in case 
of mutual war with a third power, as provided in the 20th article 
of the Treaty with the Netherlands, the free navigation by each 
party of the bordering or coterminous rivers and above and below 
the boundaries. 

Artie: 7. The right of each party to land the products of its 
soil within the territory of the other free of all duty, when the 
same is intended to be and is actually shipped to any other country. 

Artie: 8. To provide for the Indian relations as in the 23rd 
[33rd] Article of the Treaty between the United States and Mex- 
ico, and for removal of Indians from Texas. 

Art: 9. Provisions for consular rights. 

Art: 10. The right of succession and inheritance to the estates 
of deceased citizens dying intestate to be preserved as in the coun- 
try of which they were the subjects, tho' temporarily domiciled 
abroad. 

Art: 11. The Treaty to continue for ten years.^'^^ 

To this communication Webster replied on September 20, stat- 
ing that on account of a press of other matters he would not be 
able at that time to discuss the matter of a treaty with Texas, and 
that on account of his absence in the North it would not be pos- 
sible to take the matter up before December,^"^ so the administra- 
tion of Tjamar came to a close without any definite action having 
been taken on the proposals of Texas. 

The succeeding administration took up the same policy, how- 
ever, and a brief statement is necessary to complete the story of 
rhe negotiations. Bee, who had absented himself from Washing- 

""Dip. Cor. Tex. I, 517. 
""Ibid., I, 517-518. 



174 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 

ton for the greater part of the summer and fall of 1841, was re- 
called in a sharp letter of censure, and James Eeily was sent armed 
with full powers to negotiate a treaty. For a good part of this 
year Webster was engaged in the Webster-Ashburton negotiations 
over the Northeast boundary, and it was not until July 30, 1842, 
that the draft of a treaty was signed by the Texan charge d'affaires 
and the American secretary of stute.^"^ The draft of the treaty 
contained twenty-two articles, and followed generally the subjects 
suggested by the Texan charge d'affaires in September, 1841. 
Freedom of commercial intercourse was to be guaranteed, and 
duties were to be reciprocal: the use of the Eed Eiver, and all 
rivers having their sources or origin in Texas, and emptying into 
the Mississippi, and even the Mississippi, were free to the navi- 
gation of both parties; right of deposit was allowed without duties 
while reshipment was being made, and raw cotton was to be im- 
ported into each countrv for five years free of duty. Other articles 
dealt with blockade, rights of neutrals, prizes, and transference of 
property. A consular service was provided for, and a final article 
provided for extradition of criminals. 

The main cause for demanding a treaty on the part of Texas 
was the unsatisfactory situation with regard to the border Indians. 
It will be remembered that the Texans desired that the United 
States guarantee Texas against the peaceable immigration of 
United States Indians, and that the United States should remove 
those which had come into Texas from the United States. Before 
negotiations got under way, however, Texas had surrendered that 
point, and the agreement was according to the contention of the 
United States, with ambiguities removed. It was agreed "that 
the two contracting parties, by all the means in their power, main- 
tain peace and harmony among the several Indian tribes who in- 
habit the lands adjacent to the lines and rivers which form the 
boundaries of the two countries," and in order to attain that re- 
sult force was to be used, "so that Texas will not permit the In- 
dians residing within her territory, to attack the citizens of the 
United States or the Indians residing within the limits of the 
United States, nor will the United States suffer their Indians to 
attack the citizens of Texas nor the Indians inhabiting her terri- 

""Rciley to Jones, August 3. 1842. Dip. Cor. Tex., I, 576. 



Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Administration 1T5 

tory, in any manner whatsoever." Captives were to be returned 
by the two governments."" 

This treaty was never liinding on the two governments as rati- 
fications were never exchanged. The Texas Senate on January 
16, 1843, ratified it with an amendment to article V, which per- 
mitted free importation of raw cotton,"^ while in March, 1843, 
the Fnited States Senate ratified it after striking out articles- 
TV and Y. which provided for freedom of navigation of the rivers, 
including the Mississippi, and right of deposit at New Orleans 
and other points. JSTo further action was taken by either country, 
as by this time the annexation issue was becoming of supreme in- 
terest again. 

Another topic that requires some discussion here, and which I 
have already mentioned in a discussion of the relations of Mexico 
and Texas, is the attitude assumed by the United States during^ 
the efPorts of Texas to establish peace with Mexico. When Dun- 
lap was sent to the United States in the place of Bee, who was sent 
to Mexico, he was instructed to ask for the mediation of the 
United States between Texas and ]\Iexico."^ Forsyth gave a lim- 
ited agreement to this policy, while acting at all times cautiously.. 
The purport of the instructions was that through the mediation, 
of the American secretary of state, Dunlap should get into com- 
munication with the Mexican minister, and by some means agree 
on a treaty with him. It appears that Forsyth did speak to the 
Spanish minister, without taking any decided stand one way or 
another. In a private letter to Lamar, May 16, 1839, Dunlap 
wrote : 

I am requested by Mr. Forsythe to give you a private letter 
relative to our interview this day, concerning the mediation of 
this Govt, with our ^Mexican difiiculties — as the result may not 
be subject to a call of Congress. lie said to the IMexican minister 
that the Govet. of Texas had asked the mediation of his Govet. 
with the hope of settling on amicable terms, by a treaty of peace 
and limits the present difficulties between Texas and ]\Iexico — and 
that his Go^•et. would be very happy to interpose, should it be the 
wish of Mexico.^" 

""The complete text of the treaty can be found in Dip. Cor. Tex., I, 622- 
628. 

"^Secret Journals of the Senate, 276. 
"=Dip. Cor. Tex., I, 369. 
^'Wip. Cor. Tex., 1, 383. 



176 Miraheau Buormparte Lamar 

This was certainly non-committal enough; but the instructions 
to Ellis, who was just being sent as minister to Mexico, were less 
in harmony with the desires of Texas. Ellis was instructed to be 
ready, while observing strict neutrality, to interpose his good offices 
between Mexico and Texas, but not until Mexico should ask for 
them. There is no evidence that Mexico asked for the mediation 
of Ellis, and none that he ever offered mediation. But the Texan 
minister was characteristically optimistic, and read into Forsyth's 
attitude a solicitude for Texas which was unjustified. "Mr. Ellis 
will be instructed to say to Prest Santa Anna that should Mexico 
desire the mediation of this Govnt," he wrote, "that nothing will 
give her more pleasure than to interpose"; but Ellis was not in- 
structed to make any such statement. Apparently, from the in- 
structions, all advances were to come from the Mexicans before 
Ellis would have been expected to offer the good offices of the 
United States. 

No further developments came on this line until April, 1840. 
Bee, who had succeeded Dunlap as minister in Washington, com- 
municated to Forsyth information concerning the killing of Colonel 
Johnson and his party while returning from the Eio Grande coun- 
try after promulgating Lamar's proclamation of neutrality as be- 
tween the Centralists and Federalists, and again asked the United 
States to mediate between Mexico and Texas. '^^* In answer, For- 
syth informed Mr. Bee "that although he is entirely correct in 
supposing that the United States desire that the relations between 
Texas and Mexico may be established upon a friendly footing, 
nothing has occurred since the communications on that subject 
from this Department to the Predecessors of Mr. Bee as the Rep- 
resentatives of Texas here, to render a change of the determina- 
tion of this Government expedient."^^^ This cool response effec- 
tively closed the matter, and it did not reappear until after the 
close of Lamar's administration. 

Another way in which the United States showed a correct con- 
ception of neutrality, was in refusing to allow seamen for the Texas 
navy to be recruited in American ports. At the beginning of 
Lamar's administration, as I have shown in another chapter, the 
\essels contracted for by his predecessor began to arrive, but they 

"'Bee to Forsylh, April 5, 1840, Dip. Cor. Tex.. I. 451. 
""Forsyth to Bee (copy), May 4, 1840, Dip. Cor. Tex., I, 453. 



Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Adrninistraiion 177 

were not manned, and it was hoped to secure seamen from the 
United States. Ideiitenant Moore, commander of the sloop Boston 
in the United States navy, resigned his commission and was ap- 
pointed as commander of the Texan navy. In reporting this 
resignation to the Texan authorities, Dunlap wrote, July 21, 1839, 
suggesting that the best plan to obtain tried seamen was to send 
the vessels back to New York or some other port, and let the com- 
manding officer announce the number of men desired. He said 
that was the method advised by those most skilled in the matter. 
He stated that no notice would be taken when the ships left, con- 
cluding, ''This is the best port for such an enterprise as conceal- 
ment is more certain amidst such large and busy masses as con- 
tinually throng this city.^'^^^ 

The government of Texas accepted the guarantees of Dunlap, 
and followed his advice, sending the ships to various American 
ports for recruits, Moore himself proceeding to New York, It 
seems, however, that the authorities of the United States were not 
so blind as Dunlap anticipated, A letter from Forsyth to Dunlap 
on January 15, 1840, enclosing documents showing that Moore had 
been violating the neutrality law of 18 IS, and announcing his pur- 
pose to begin legal proceedings against Moore, said, "As you will 
without doubt promptly inform your Government of the grounds 
and motives for the proceedings against Mr Moore and his con- 
federates, no erroneous impressions in regard to them can be re- 
ceiver! but it will understand that they have originated in the 
desire and determination of the Executive of the United States 
to use all legal means to preserve our neutrality between Texas 
and Mexico, and to maintain relations of friendship and good will 
with both governments," He also announced the determination 
of his government to exclude Texan vessels of war from American 
ports in case of any future violation of the law.''" 

The charge against IMoore, substantially supported by docu- 
ments, was that for some time he had been engaged in hiring and 
retaining within the territory of the United States, citizens of 
the United States and other persons to enlist themselves in the 
service of the Eepublic of Texas as mariners or seamen on board 
the brig of war, Colorado. In spite of his suggestion that this 

"'Dunlap to Lamar, July 21, 1839. Dip. Cor. Tex., 411. 
"'Forsyth to Dunlap, .January 15, 1840 (copy enclosed in Dunlap to 
Burnet, January 27, 1840), Dip. Cor. Tex., I, 437. 



178 Miraheau Bunnaparfe Lamar 

procedure be followed in securing mariners and seamen, Dunlap 
expressed great surprise that any attempt was being made to 
evade the laws of the United States. He felt confident, he said, 
that his government would not do any act inconsistent with that 
spirit of conciliation and good will which she had so fondly cher- 
ished towards both the government and citizens of the United 
States. He protested that the exclusion of Texan vessels from 
American ports was threatened without giving Moore a fair and 
complete trial. On January 27, 1840, he sent a note to the sec- 
retary of state for the United States enclosing a copy of one from 
Commodore Moore disclaiming having enlisted any seamen in 
violation of an act of Congress. To this Forsyth replied, calling 
attention to the discrepancy between Moore's letter and the docu- 
ments already presented, and stating that since Moore had left 
the waters of the United States of his own accord, no further 
action on the part of the United States was necessary. Thus the 
matter closed."** 

.//. Relations with, France and England 

When William H. Wharton was sent as minister to the United 
States in November, 1836, he was instructed, if the United States 
should be indifferent or adverse to the claims of Texas to recog- 
nition or annexation, to keep in touch with the ministers of Eng- 
land and France, "'explaining to them the great commercial ad- 
vantages that will result to their nations from our cotton, etc., and 
finding a market here for their merchandise, and an outlet for 
their surplus population, on the basis of low duties and liberal 
encouragement which it will be our interest to establish." In a 
postscript the Texan secretary of state, Stephen F. Austin, re- 
peated his instructions that in no case was the minister to look 
for support to other quarters unless the United States should give 
evidence of a lack of friendly interest.^ In February, 1837, Whar- 
ton became discouraged at the prospect of recognition by the 
United States, and wrote that he had put the British and French 
ministers in possession of documents explanatory of the objects 
of the contest with Mexico, and that he had requested them to 
ascertain whether or not their countries would receive a diplomatic 

"'For this correspondence see Dip. Cor. Tex., I. 436-442. 

^Austin to Wharton, November 18, 18.36, Dip. Cor. Tex., I, 137, 140. 



Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Administration 179 

agent from Texas for the purpose of entering into a treaty of 
commerce.^ 

Partly as a result of the obvious indifference of the United 
States to annexation, and to encourage a more favorable attitude 
by appealing to European countries, and partly from a desire to 
strengthen the financial system by securing recognition abroad, 
the Congress which assembled in May, 1837, passed a resolution 
requesting the President to appoint an agent to Great Britain, 
and later in a secret joint resolution, it authorized the President 
to instruct the agent to visit France, in order to secure recogni- 
tion of their independence by those powers, and to form a com- 
mercial treaty.^ J. Pinckney Henderson, who had acted as secre- 
tary of state for awhile after the death of Austin, was commis- 
sioned on June 30 as agent under these resolutions, and he ar- 
rived in London on October 9, 1837. 

Texan affairs had been under discussion in Parliament in 1836, 
when the anti-slavery interests expressed concern over the possible 
effect of Texan independence on slavery and the slave trade. On 
June 5^ 1836, Mr. Barlow Hoy interrogated the foreign minister, 
Palmerston, as to whether or not he had received any communi- 
cation relative to the establishment of slavery in Texas. Palmer- 
ston responded that he had not, but that Texas was in a state of 
revolt from Mexico, and that no action could be taken until the 
outcome of that revolt was knowTi. Two months later, August 5, 
while the supply bill was under discussion. Hoy moved an address 
to the cro^Ti praying "that such measures may be taken as may 
seem proper to secure fulfillment of the existing treaty between 
this country and Mexico ; and to prevent the establishment of slav- 
ery and traffic in slaves in the province of Texas in the Mexican 
territory." He supported this motion in a long speech in which 
he emphasized three points, first, the large amount of money in- 
vested in Mexican bonds ; secondly, the danger of annexation by 
the United States ; and thirdly, the probability that slavery would 
be permanently established in Texas. He urged Palmerston to 
send a naval force for the purpose of assisting Mexico in regaining 
control of the revolted province, 

I'almerston in opposing the motion disposed of the fears of Hoy 

=VVharton to Rusk, February 12, 1837, Ibid., I, 185. 

'Gammel, Laws of Texas, I, 1287; Secret Journals of the Senate, 315. 



180 Miraheau Buonaparte Lamar 

and the other abolitionists by saying that if there were a prospect 
of annexation to the United States, it would be time for England 
to interest herself, but that the message of the President of the 
United States indicated that annexation was unlikely; that if 
Mexico reconquered Texas the laws of Mexico would apply, and 
the treaty would be enforced, so that there was no necessity to in- 
terfere on that account: and finally, that if Texas should in the 
future become a part of the United States there might be impor- 
tation of slaves from other states, but importation from Africa was 
unlikely.* Palmerston's speech satisfied Hoy, and he withdrew 
his motion; but, as will be seen, the question of slavery and the 
slave trade continued to operate against recognition of Texan in- 
dependence by England. 

Henderson held his first conversation with Palmerston on Octo- 
ber 13, and urged upon him the desire of Texas for recognition by 
England. Palmerston promised no more than that the matter 
would be considered by the cabinet as a whole. The conversation 
included such topics as the commercial benefits to England from 
recognition, the question of annexation, slavery and the slave trade, 
the possibility of reconquest of Texas by Mexico.^ On October 26 
Henderson addressed a long letter to Palmerston in which he 
traced the history of Texas for several years past, and again urged 
recognition by England, receiving only the promise that the mat- 
ter would be laid before the cabinet. On December 21 Palmerston 
announced the decision of the cabinet that they were not ready 
to give a definite decision at that time, as there seemed still a 
possibility that Mexico would succeed in reconquering Texas. 
Henderson attempted to secure a promise that if Mexico had not 
succeeded in subjugating Texas within a few months England 
would recognize the independence of Texas, but Palmerston re- 
fused to make that promise, advising the Texans to look well to 
slavery conditions if they desired any consideration from England. 
Henderson regarded this as final and proceeded to France, after 
securing an agreement that Texan vessels would be admitted into 
British ports under the treaty between Mexico and Great Britain.® 

^Hansard, Parliame'ntary History of England, Sd Ser., XXXIV, 1107; 
XXXV, 928-942. 

'Henderson to Irion, October 14, 1837, Dip. Cor. Tex., Ill, 812. 

"Henderson to Irion, December 22, 1837, January 5, 30, April 12, 1838, 
Dip. Cor. Tex., Ill, 831, 839, 843, 853. 



Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Adntinvitration 181 

Before proceeding with a discussion of later efforts on the part 
of the Texas government to secure recognition, it will be well to 
notice briefly a few episodes that caused some friction between 
the new republic and England, and perhaps served in a measure 
to delay recognition. In the summer of 1837 a British schooner, 
LitUe Penn, bound from Liverpool to Tabasco loaded with British 
goods ran aground on the Yucatan coast. Two Mexican vessel'^, 
the Paz and the Ahispa, were sent to salvage the cargo, the Paz 
returning safely to port, but the Ahispa falling in with two Texan 
vessels and being captured. The owners of the cargo, F. Lizardi 
and Company, submitted a claim to the British Government for 
the sum of £3640. On August 3, 1837, a Texan vessel of war 
took as a prize the British schooner Eliza Russell, commanded by 
Captain Joseph Russell, and brought her into port at Galveston. 
The Texan Government immediately ordered her release, but the 
delay gave Russell grounds for a claim against the government 
for £865. The Texas Government immediately acknowledged the 
justness of the claim for the Eliza Riissell, though there was con- 
siderable delay in making an appropriation for settlement of the 
claim, which resulted in a threat on the part of Palmerston to send 
a warship to Texas to collect the claims.'^ This threat brought 
about the appropriation of a sum to settle the claim for the Eliza 
Riissell, but the claim for the Little Penn was never recognized 
by Texas. 

Just before Henderson arrived in London an agreement was 
reached on September 15, by the British holders of Mexican bonds 
and agents of the Mexican Government by which it was proposed 
to pay a part of the bonds by lands to be located in Texas. The 
Lizardi Company, a Mexican company in Tjondon, which was tho 
chief holder of Mexican bonds, advertised a meeting on October 
16 and from day to day thereafter for the purpose of carrying 
into effect the agreement. Henderson secured from Palmerston a 
disclaimer on the part of the British Government of any interest 
in the matter, and on October 16 wrote a formal protest to Lizardi 
and Company, stating that Texas was no longer under the sov- 
eroisfnty of Mexico, and that the agreement was void.® Few of 

Talmerston to Henderson, October 23. 1839. 4 Tex. Cong.. JIousc Journal, 
33-34. 

'Henderson to Irion, November ">, 1838. enclosing Henderson to Lizardi 
and Company, October 16, 1838, Dip. Cor. Tex., Ill, 830. 



183 Miraheau Buonaparte Lamar 

the bondholders took advantage of the offer at that time. This 
illustrates, however, the difficulties in the way of securing recog- 
nition. Ijater, as we have already seen, an effort was made to se- 
cure the acknowledgment of Texan independence by Mexico in 
return for an assumption of a part of the Mexican debt by Texas. 

Two other obstacles in the way of recognition were the possi- 
bility that Texas would encourage the slave .trade, if she made 
good her independence, and the desire of G-reat Britain to pose 
as the friend of Mexico. The interest of Great Britain in slavery 
in Texas I shall refer to later. From commercial reasons Great 
Britain desired to maintain the friendship of Mexico, and until 
the independence of Texas was unquestionably established, Palmer- 
ston felt it inexpedient to recognize it; and it was not until Texas 
had so proved her independence that failure to acknowledge its 
independence would have caused greater loss than the straining 
of Mexican friendship, that recognition was extended. During 
1838 the British Government secretly connived at the French 
blockade of the Mexican ports, the British naval commander being 
instructed to leave Mexican waters before hostilities could take 
place: and when hostilities did begin the British Government 
offered to mediate between the French and the Mexicans, and the 
conduct of the British mediators convinced the Mexicans of the 
sincere friendship of the British Government, An effort was made 
to mediate between Mexico and Texas, also, the British Govern- 
ment, while refusing to recognize the independence of Texas, urg- 
ing Mexico to acknowledge independence. 

With the withdrawal of Henderson from Ijondon in April, 1838, 
the direct connection between the Texan Government and Great 
Britain was interrupted until the fall of 1839. In the meantime, 
however, Palmerston showed himself not indifferent to the claims 
of Texas, and urged on Mexico the necessity of recognizing Texan 
independence. As T have already stated, Palmerston instructed 
Pakenham, the British minister to Mexico, in October, 1838, to 
urge Mexico to acknowledge the independence of Texas, laying 
stress upon the importance of creating a barrier state between 
Mexico and the United States. At that time Gorostiza, the Mex- 
ican foreign minister, refused to entertain the suggestion because 
of its unpopularity, but suggested that an armistice might be 
granted if some European country would undertake to guarantee 
the boundary. These instructions were verbal, but in April, 1839, 



Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Administration 183 

Palmcrston sent written instructions to the same effect.^ The 
further efforts of the British minister to mediate I have shown 
adequately in another connection. 

J 11 the summer of 1839, Christopher Hughes, American charge 
d'affaires in Sweden, returned from a vacation in the United 
States by way of London. On June 10, 1839, he addressed a note 
to Ijord Palmcrston submitting a memorandum prepared by Anson 
Jones, as Texan minister to the United States, giving reasons for 
the recognition of Texan independence. Hughes supported the 
claims with a brief note on his own account. The action of Hughes 
was entirely on his own account, and without the knowledge of 
his government. It is interesting only because it drew from 
Palmerston a brief reply, in which he said, "Thank you for your 
letter about Texas, which I have sent to Lord Melbourne. The 
subject, to which it relates is important, but not without diffi- 
culties.'"" No doubt the chief difficulty referred to was the op- 
position of the abolition party in parliament led by O'Connell. 
On July 9, 1839, O'Connell interrogated the foreign minister as 
to whether anything had been done toward the recognition of 
Texas. Palmerston replied that application had been made the 
preceding year by persons from Texas, but that he had stated 
that the ministry were not yet ready to recognize Texas, but that 
he had instructed the minister to Mexico to endeavor to bring 
about some imderstanding between Texas and Mexico. He did 
not inform the House that the instructions called for a recognition 
of Texan independence by Mexico.^^ Henderson was convinced 
that the opposition of O'Connell was the only obstacle to recog- 
nition, and wrote to Anson Jones, September 27, 1839, from Paris: 

I shall go to England in a few days and urge that Government 
to recognize or refuse, and give their reasons for so doing. I 
scarcely hope they will comply with my main request, inasmuch 
as Mr. O'Connell has threatened them with his vengeance if they 
do recognize. That threat he made in a speech in Parliament a 
few days before it adjourned, and you Icnow the present ministry 
of England dare not run counter to his wishes.^^ 

"Adams, British Interests and Activities in Texas, 28. 29. 
'"ITuijhes to Jones. June 10, 1839. Jones. Memoranda and Official Corre- 
spondence Relatinff to the Republic of Texas, 148-152. 
"Hansard, 3d Series, XLIX, 82. 
"Jones, Memoranda, etc., 148. 



184 Miraheau Buonaparte Lamar 

In Ma3\ 1839, James Hamilton was appointed as a loan com- 
missioner under the five million dollar loan act, to dispose of the 
bonds of Texas in the United States and Europe. He was also 
commissioned as a joint agent with Henderson to secure the rec- 
ognition of Texas by Great Britain and France, and to enter into 
a treaty of amity, commerce, and navigation. Hamilton had be- 
come interested in Texas as early as 1836, and in the fall of 1838 
he hoped for the appointment by President Houston as loan com- 
missioner, but his desires were not realized. As soon as it was 
knoMTi that Lamar was to be the successor of Houston Hamilton 
wrote numerous letters to him suggesting means of floating a loan, 
and as soon as practicable after his inauguration Lamar appointed 
him to the place mentioned. Hamilton proved prolific in schemes 
for securing financial aid and recognition, and it is likely that 
his arguments appealed to Palmerston, resulting finally in several 
treaties between Texas and Great Britain. 

On May 30, 1839, the same day on which his commission was 
signed, he wrote a letter to H. S. Fox, British minister at Wash- 
ington, for transmittal to Pakenham, British minister at Mexico, 
outlining his views as to the advantage to Great Britain of recog- 
nition of Texas. This letter was not transmitted until some 
months later, but it, with other information concerning Texas 
and Mexico, was faithfully transmitted to Palmerston by Paken- 
ham, and served to prepare the way for the active negotiations 
undertaken by Hamilton the following vear. The immediate pur- 
pose of the letter was to secure the good offices of Pakenham to 
mediate betwen Mexico and Texas while Bee was still attempting 
to get into communication with the Mexican authorities. It was 
in this letter that he adopted a policy, already discussed by Bee 
and Gordon, representative of Lizardi and Company in New Or- 
leans, — offering the payment by Texas of a sum of money to be 
applied to the payment of Mexican bonds in return for a recog- 
nition of her independence within the boundaries demanded. After 
expressing his desire that Pakenham mediate between Mexico and 
TexaS; he proceeded to give arguments to show the advantage to 
Great Britain if Texan independence should be accomplished 
through British mediation. In the first place, he said, the im- 
pending blockade of Mexican ports by Texan vessels might cause 
serious difficulty as Great Britain would hesitate to recognize the 
blockade, and bloodshed might ensue; secondly. Great Britain 



Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Adminisiration 185 

had an incalculable interest in the trade of Texas; thirdly, Great 
Britain might feel a delicacy in recognizing Texas until Mexico 
had recognized: fourthly, as soon as Great Britain recognized 
Texas she could obtain through the value of her commerce with 
Texas, the concurrence of Texas in suppressing the slave trade, 
which Texas had prohibited by her Constitution." 

Hamilton left New York on August 1, arriving in London in 
September. He had a conference with Palmerston, but nothing 
definite came of it, and he proceeded to the continent to attempt 
to secure the loan. Eeceiving little encouragement, he returned 
to the United States, and in December he was in Texas, where he 
secured a resolution of Congress permitting him to asume five mil- 
lion dollars of the Mexican bonds in case recognition by Mexico 
were secured, and authorizing him to borrow money for the pur- 
pose. Henderson having been recalled Hamilton was commis- 
sioned as agent to Great Britain, and authorized to sign a treaty 
of amity, commerce, and navigation. He was also authorized to 
enter into an agreement with the holders of Mexican bonds.^* 
Before returning to Europe Hamilton wrote a letter to Palmer- 
ston, February 10, 1840, repeating his arguments for British me- 
diation, and suggested further that Great Britain should threaten 
to recognize Texas if Mexico refused to agree to British medi- 
ation .^ ^ 

On April 18, 1840, Hamilton was given a commission as diplo- 
matic commissioner to the Netherlands and Belgium for the pur- 
pose of negotiating a treaty of recognition, and to conclude com- 
mercial treaties with those two countries. He proceeded direct to 
The Hague, where ho concluded a treaty of amity, commerce and 
navigation with the Netherlands on September 18, 1840. He 
went from there to Brussels and initiated a treaty with the Bel- 
gium Government, which was broken off at that time, and he pro- 
ceeded to England, arriving in London on September 27, when 
he found Palmerston so busily engaged on the Eastern question 
that no attention could then be paid to the claims of Texas.' ^ 

"Hamilton to Fox, May 20, 1839, Dip. Cor. Tex., Ill, 867-871. 

"The commission is dated December 20, 1839. Dip. Cor. Tex., Ill, 877. 

"Hamilton to Palmerston. February 10. 1840, enclosed in Hamilton to 
Lipscomb, February 25, 1840, Dip. Cor. Tex.. Ill, 887. 

'"See Hamilton to Jones, February 18, 1842, Dip. Cor. Tex., III. 9 45, for 
a brief history of Hamilton's procedure. 



186 Mirnheau Buonaparte Lamar 

It is evident that Palmerston had made up his mind to recognize 
Texas before the arrival of Hamilton, and when negotiations did 
begin they proceeded rapidly to a conclusion. On October 1 Ham- 
ilton addressed a brief formal note to Palmerston laying his cre- 
dentials before the foreign minister, and asking for recognition 
on the grounds that Texas had de facto achieved her independence, 
and that she had established a government.^^ On the 1-lth he 
laid before the British Government the arguments on which he 
based the claim of Texas to recognition. The reasons for the rec- 
ognition and the consequences of failure, which Hamilton thought 
would appeal to Palmerston, were as follows : 

Reasons why Great Britain ought to recognize the Independence 
of Texas & form a treaty with her. 

1st. The future & rapidly increasing value of the Trade with 
Texas, under a judicious commercial Convention. 

2nd. By this means she secures a great Cotton producer and 
important consumer of her Manufactures, as her customer & a 
friendly neutral in the event of a war with the United States — 

3rd. The Recognition of Texas by Great Britain inevitably 
Superinduces peace between Mexico & Texas. 

4th. Peace at this moment between Mexico & Texas will in- 
evitably insure the payment of a portion of the Mexican debt by 
Texas. 

5th. It likewise msures under the friendly mediation of Eng- 
land a permanent Boundary Line between Mexico & Texas, which 
will be inviolably observed by Texas, & repress the spirit of future 
conquest on the part of the Anglo-American race — 

In case England does not recognize the following consequences 
are likely to follow — 

1st. In sixty days from this day Vera Cruz, Tampico & Mata- 
moras will be iDlockaded by the Texian Squadron, which consists 
of one Corvette, two Brigs, three Schooners & one naval Steamer, 
now off the Coast of Mexico, while Mexico will be destitute of all 
naval force whatsoever. 

2nd. If Texas is informed that Great Britain will not recog- 
nize her Independence & that consequently there is no hope of 
peace with Mexico, she will forthwith join the Federalists, revo- 
lutionize the northern provinces of Mexico & make such additions 
to her territory as the laws of war would justify under the usages 
of civilized nations. 

3rd. Great Britain has an obvious interest in avoiding a dis- 
criminating duty which will be levied against the productions of 

"Dip. Cor. Tex., Ill, 925. 



Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Administration 187 

all nations wliicli have not recognized Texas & formed Commer- 
cial Treaties with her on or before the 1st of Feby. next. 

4th. If Her Majesty's Government should decline recognizing 
I must avail myself of the present situation of public affairs in 
Europe & make the most beneficial arrangements I can with some 
continental nation giving it exclusive commercial advantages for 
a valuable equivalent. 

5th. Texas greatly prefers a friendly alliance with England 
from all those considerations which are connected with a common 
origin — But if Great Britain refuses all international compan- 
ionship with her, she will be driven to seek friendly & profitable 
associations elsewhere.'"' 

Four days later Palmerston responded that Great Britain was 
willing to enter into negotiation for a treaty of commerce and 
navigation between Great Britain and Texas, "believing the time 
to be now come when the independence of Texas may be consid- 
ered as being, de facto, fully established; and, when the interests 
of Great Britain require, that the commercial intercourse between 
Great Britain and Texas shall be placed under the security to be 
afforded by a Treaty." Having announced the willingness of his 
Government to negotiate a treaty, he laid down the condition that 
Texas at the same time should enter into a treaty to suppress the 
slave trade. The peculiar geographical position and internal ar- 
rangements of Texas, he said, made it incumbent on the British 
Government to make the conclusion of such a treaty a sine qua non 
condition of any other treaty between Great Britain and Texas. 
He sent with his letter the draft of a convention in which recip- 
rocal right of search by naval vessels was provided for. The draft 
of the treaty, which Avas accepted by Hamilton with only slight 
modification, provided for the right of search by certain cruisers 
of merchant vessels, which might on reasonable grounds be sus- 
pected of being engaged in the slave trade, in order that, if found 
guilty they might be sent to their own country for adjudication 
before their own tribunals. The search should take place only 
on a specific warrant of the government to which the vessel to be 
searched belonged. 

Hamilton's commission did not authorize him to sign such a 
convention, but he felt that the importance of recognition and a 
commercial treaty with Great Britain justified him in going be- 
yond his instructions, and on the ?Oth he wrote Palmerston of his 

''Adams. British Interests and Activities in Texas, 5.3. 



188 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 

willingness to sign the convention with minor changes, which was 
not so difficult to do since the Texan merchant vessel could engage 
in the slave trade and be under no danger of seizure except on 
warrant of the Texas authorities, and upon seizure it would be 
tried only in Texas courts.^" Preliminarv articles for a treaty of 
amity, commerce, and navigation were agreed upon on November 
5, and on the 13th the completed treaty was signed by Palmerston 
and Hamilton. On the following day a convention was signed 
which bound Texas to assume a million pounds sterling of the 
Mexican debt, if within six months Mexico had acknowledged the 
independence of Texas through British mediation. On the 16th 
the slave trade treaty was signed.^" 

The commercial treaty and the mediation convention were sent 
out on December 3 by a special messenger, Arthur Ikin, and ar- 
rived in Texas early in January. They were laid before the Sen- 
ate and promptly ratified without opposition. The slave trade 
treaty was sent by another messenger, A. T. Burnley, who was 
associated with Hamilton as loan commissioner. Burnley went by 
another route, and did not arrive in Texas until February 21, 1841, 
after the adjournment of Congress, and the ratification of that 
treaty was delayed until the following session. The British Gov- 
ernment refused to exchange ratifications until all three of the 
treaties had been ratified by Texas, and it was not until June 28, 
1842, that ratification was finally exchanged, the Texas Senate 
having ratified the slave trade treaty in January of that year. 

It has been charged reasonably that Hamilton sent the slave 
trade treaty by a different messenger and by a different route in 
order to delay its receipt in Texas, for the reason that he feared 
the action of the Texas Senate on that convention. In his letter 
transmitting the commercial treaty and mediation convention he 
made no mention of the other treaty. It was a month later, Jan- 
uary 4, 1841, when the slave trade treaty was transmitted. In his 
letter of transmittal to the secretary of state Hamilton went into 
considerable detail in explaining the reasons for his exceeding his 
instructions in the matter of the treatv. The trepidation that he 

"Palmerston to Hamilton, October 18, 1840, and Hamilton to Palmerston, 
October 20, 1840. BriUfth and Foreign State Papers, XXIX, 617-621; Tele- 
graph and Texas Register, January 12, 1842. 

^"For the text of these treaties see Gammel, Laws of Texas. II, 880-885, 
886-904; British and Foreign State Papers, XXIX, 80-83, 84-85, 85-96. 



Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Administration 189 

felt is also indieatod bv the letter he wrote to Lamar on the same 
date. After giving a history of the negotiations, he wrote : 

I did not apprise 3^011 of the slave trade convention which I had 
to conclude with TiOrd Palmerston to ensure recognition, because 
I was fearful unattended by those explanations ]\Ir Burnley might 
afford, it would be liable to misconstruction. Eeferring you to my 
letter to the Secretary of State, and mv correspondence with Lord 
Palmerston, I have only to add that I am sure you will concur 
in the necessity of my acquiescing in such a convention, when Mr 
Burnley shows you the opinion of the Solicitor of the Bank of 
England, who advised us that no valid contract could be made in 
the security of the bonds of an unrecognized Government.^^ 

Why Ikin could not have made the suitable explanations does 
not appear, though Hamilton informed Aberdeen, who had suc- 
ceeded Palmerston in the foreign office, that he had sent the docu- 
ment by a man well qualified to press it on the people of Texas, 
and that the illness of his messenger in New York had prevented 
his arrival in time. He proceeded to press upon the British Gov- 
ernment the negotiation of a new treaty granting extensive com- 
mercial privileges to Great Britain, but as this was in nowise a 
policy of the Texan Government, and was rejected out of hand 
by the British Government, I shall not discuss it here.^ 

The failure of ratification of the treaties left the relations be- 
tween Texas and Great Britain in the same situation as from the 
beginning. Though Hamilton was commissioned as minister 
plenipotentiary, he was unable to assume that dignity and was 
forced to continue only as diplomatic agent. The British Gov- 
ernment did, however, in anticipation of the ratification of the 
Slave Trade Treaty appoint Charles Elliot, as consul-general to 
Texas, and toward the close of the year 1841, William Kennedy 
was sent as an agent to secure the ratification of the Slave Trade 
Treaty.^ ^ 

The treaty with the Netherlands negotiated by Hamilton in 
September, 1840, was promptly ratified by the Texan Senate. I 
have noted that PTamilton was negotiating a treaty with Belgium 

^'Hamilton to Lamar, January 4, 1841, Dip. Cor. Tex., Ill, 929. 

"For the terms offered by Hamilton, see Adams, British Interests and 
Activities in Texas. 68-69. 

^'Dip. Cor. Tex., Ill, 942; Adams, ed., British Correspondence Concerning 
Texas, The Quaktebly, XV, 251, 252. 



190 Miraheau Buonaparte Lamar 

when it became necessary for him to leave for London. No satis- 
factory basis of agreement was reached between Hamilton and the 
Belgian Government until the fall of 1841. Under this agree- 
ment Texas would admit cotton and woolen goods^, iron, and linen 
manufactured in Belgium at one-half the existing duty, while the 
same articles from other countries should be required to pay at 
the rate of 50 per cent ad valorem. Arms and ammunition were 
to be admitted free for the Belgians, while other countries were 
to pay a duty of 100 per cent ad valorem. The coasting trade 
was to be free to Belgian ships the same as to Texan. In return 
for all these concessions, Belgium was to guarantee a loan of 
37,000,000 francs by a specific endorsement of the bonds of the 
republic of Texas. This extremely disadvantageous treaty was 
rejected promptly by the Texan Senate on October 20, 1841.^* 

The other European country that showed active interest in 
Texas was France, and it was to France that the new republic 
turned for finances when other sources failed them. The fact 
that France was never able to contribute to the financial needs 
of Texas by either furnishing or guaranteeing a loan did not for 
a long time dampen the ardor of the loan commissioners, who 
were prolific with schemes for securing a loan. But the first in- 
terest of Texas was in securing the recognition of independence by 
France, as well as by the other European powers. 

When Henderson withdrew from London in April, 1838, he 
went immediately to Paris, where he found a much less indif- 
ferent attitude than he had found in London. It will be remem- 
bered that France was just entering upon the blockade of Mexican 
ports, which might be expected to create an interest on the part 
of France in the claims of Texas. On account of the interest of 
the Government in the Mexican matter, Henderson was not re- 
ceived until May 31, and at that time he was given no assurance 
that his request for recognition would be favorably acted upon; 
but the Government immediately instructed the French minister 
at Washington to send one of his secretaries to Texas in order to 
report on the conditions there. Alphonse de Saligny was sent, 
though he did not make his report until late summer of 1839. 
On October 1 the foreign minister. Count Mole informed Hen- 
derson that the Government was disposed to wait until the re- 

-*8ecret Journals of the Senate, 222, 224. 



Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Administration 191 

ceipt of the report of their agent before extending recognition. 
At the same time Mole requested Henderson to remain in Paris, 
as France was desirous of making a commercial arrangement with 
Texas that would serve to encourage commerce until the time 
of recognition, to which Henderson readily assented.^'' Early in 
November Henderson signed on the part of his Government an 
agreement similar to that entered into with Great Britain — "Until 
the mutual relations of France and Texas are regulated in a com- 
plete and definitive manner, the Citizens, the vessels and the Mer- 
chandize of the two Countries shall enjoy in every respect in each 
of the Countries the treatment accorded, or which may eventually 
be accorded to the most favored Nation, conformably moreover to 
the Eespective Usages."-" 

In April, 1839, Admiral Baudin, minister plenipotentiary to 
Mexico and commander of the French naval forces in the Gulf 
of Mexico, who had been blockading the Mexican ports while treat- 
ing with the Mexican Government, sent the Abbe M. B. Anduze 
to Texas for the purpose of agreeing to joint action on the part 
of Texas and France should hostilities between France and Mexico 
be renewed. This action was in response to an informal expres- 
sion of Lamar to the French consul at New Orleans before he had 
determined to send a diplomatic agent to Mexico. "You will per- 
ceive, Mr. President," he wrote, 

by tlie letter of the Admiral, which I have the honor to deliver to 
your Excellency, that I am authorized to enquire into that matter. 
With every disposition of the Admiral to meet the Government 
of Texas in an agreement, which shall be mutually beneficial and 
satisfactory, permit me therefore to ask. 

First, What would be the nature of the co-operation of Texas 
in the event of a new war between France and Mexico? 

Second, What would be the extent of your demands, in money,, 
war ammunitions, means of transportation, etc. ? 

Third, W'hat would be the guarantees offered for the reimburse- 
ment of the advances thus made? 

Though this Mission of mine, Mr. President does not proceed 
directly from the French Government, as the propositions will, I 
hope, be mutually advantageous, both to you and to France, The 

^"Henderson to Irion (and enclosures), October 5, 1838, Dip. Cor. Tex., 
Ill, 1220. 

■'"Dip. Cor. Tex., Ill, 1233-1234. 



192 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 

Admiral Baudiiie will feel it his duty to obtain the approbation 
and sanction of his Government,-" 

To this communication Lamar responded through the secretary 
of state that until the result of the peace mission to Mexico should 
be known no agreement could be made for future hostilities; but 
that in the event of hostilities in the future Texas would gladly 
co-operate with France, and would bring into the field at the 
shortest notice twenty thousand soldiers and more if required — 
which, of course, was impossible — provided France advance the 
money necessary to a successful prosecution of the war.^^ Admiral 
Baudin visited Texas in May and was received with much honor 
and ceremony, which materially advanced the cordial relations of 
Texas and France. 

Saligny, who had been sent as agent to Texas in 1838, made 
his report in the summer of 1839. This report has not been 
found, but it must have been favorable as ]\Iarshal Soult, who 
had succeeded Mole as minister of foreign affairs, in July informed 
Henderson that the French Government had determined to rec- 
ognize the independence of Texas, but that they preferred to do 
it in the nature of a commercial treaty. Henderson demurred at 
this, preferring to receive recognition before entering into nego- 
iiations for a commercial treaty, as it would give him a better 
<;hance to negotiate as an equal. He was unable to change the 
French ministry, however, and in September signed a treaty of 
commerce which carried with it the recognition of Texan inde- 
pendence. Thus France was the first European country to recog- 
nize the independence of Texas. The treaty was promptly rat- 
ified by the Texas Senate, and Alphonse de Saligny was sent as 
charge d'afi'aires to the newly recognized republic.^** 

From this time until the close of the Lamar administration 
there were few striking developments in the relations between 
France and Texas. France did not find it necessary to go to war 
with Mexico again, and Texas adopted her own policy toward 

"Anduze to Lamar, April 18, 1839, Dip. Cor. Tex., Ill, 1244-1245. 

=«Webb to Baudin, April 25, 1839, Dip. Cor. Tex., Ill, 1246. 

^"Christian, "Tariff History of the Republic of Texas," The Quarterly, 
XX, 336-337 ; Gammel, Laws of Texas, II, 655. This treaty was signed by 
the plenipotentiaries on September 25, by the King of France, October 2, 
and ratified by the Texas Senate on January 14, 1840. Ratification was 
exchanged on February 14, 1840, the certificate of ratification being signed 
by Saligny and Abner S. Lipscomb, Texan secretary of state. 



Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Adminisiraiion 193 

Mexico. In the winter of 1840-1841 Saligny made himself ob- 
noxious to the Government by his strenuous advocacy of the noto- 
rious Franco-Texienne bill, which the Houston party was attempt- 
ing to pass over the opposition of the administration. The oppo- 
sition of the Government to the bill induced a coolness on the 
part of Saligny, and the assault by a Mr. Bullock on the servant 
of Saligny led to a disgraceful quarrel between Saligny and the 
secretary of state, resulting in a request for the recall of the 
French charge d'affaires. It had no other effect than the pos- 
sible one of defeating the loan negotiations in France. Saligny 
calmly waited until the close of Lamar's administration, when he 
knew the new President would be more friendly to himself and liis 
colonization projects. 

To conclude, in foreign affairs the Lamar administration was 
notably successful. At its beginning only the United States had 
acknowledged the independence of Texas, and no commercial 
rights were recognized by any country; while at its close inde- 
pendence had been recognized by France, the Netherlands, Great 
Britain, and Belgium, and favorable commercial treaties had been 
adopted with France, Great Britain, and the Netherlands. A 
notable failure was the attempt to conciliate Mexico, but in that 
case the failure does not prove the policy unwise. The policy was 
advised and abetted by the United States and Great Britain, and 
though the Houston party criticised it, Houston found it neces- 
sary to adopt a similar policy after the beginning of his second 
administration. 



194 ^firab('au Ihtoiui parte Lamar 

CllAPTEK VI I 
CLOSING YEARS 

When President Ploiiston's first administratiou closed in De- 
cember, 1838, it was well known that he would be a candidate 
to succeed Lamar in 1841. He entered Congress in October, 1839, 
and immediately became the spokesman for those opposed to 
Lamar, and succeeded fairly well in creating an anti-administra- 
tion party in Congress. He denounced Lamar on every occasion, 
but Lamar usually contented himself with defending his admin- 
istration against attack. He took no active part in the campaign 
in 1841, though it was generally understood that he favored the 
election of the vice-president, David G. Burnet, who was running 
against Houston. It cannot be said that there was anything like 
definite party lines in the contest, and the election of Houston by 
an overwhelming majority did not indicate a complete repudia- 
tion of Lamar. Burnet was unpopular, and Ms brief tenure of 
the office of president during Lamar's illness did not make him 
any more popular. Besides, Houston understood thoroughly the 
turbulent frontier methods of campaigning, and his status at that 
time as a military hero was unquestioned. 

That Lamar's popularity had declined, however, particularly 
with Congress, cannot be denied. At the beginning of his ad- 
ministration he had an overwhelming majority of both Houses 
with him, while at its close the House of Eepresentatives was hos- 
tile, and the Senate showed only a small majority in support of 
his policies. But Houston had been less popular at the close of 
his first administration. The unpopularity of both executives was 
natural in a frontier state where each man was largely an in- 
dividualist and inclined to resist any measure of governmental 
control. The main acts and failures of the Lamar administration 
I have, already recorded. His attitude toward annexation, his 
Indian policy, the Santa Fe expedition, all aroused some oppo- 
sition ; but the total failure of the financial system during his ad- 
ministration probably caused more discontent than all the other 
matters put together. For the better part of his term he was in 



Closing Years 195 

bad healtli, and this contributed to a certain personal unpopu- 
larity. This led to a certain detachment from or coldness toward 
his friends. "I am informed," wrote ]\lemucan Hunt, 

that you are cold and repulsive in manners, &c. I plead the con- 
stant occupancy of your mind on important matters of State and 
the impossibility of those courtesies which were to be looked for 
when your mind is thus engrossed &c, &c. It is however very 
little trouble to ask a man when he reached the city, &c, &c, &c, 
&c, and I will take the liberty of recommendinfj to you to tax your- 
self in this respect.^ 

He did not engage in the usual tricks of the politician, and for 
this he deserves both praise and blame. He is to be praised for 
depending on the justice of his policies rather than on political 
movements to bring their success; but if he could have added to 
that method a little of the political tact applied with success even 
today, he would have been more successful, and probably would 
have stood higher among historians. 

His administration came to a close in December, 184:1, and he 
retired to his home in Eichmond. In the summer of 1842 he 
visited Georgia and was received with considerable honor. He 
was elected to the Phi Gamma Society of Emory College at Cov- 
ington, Georgia, and made addresses at Columbus, Macon, and 
other places.^ He returned to Texas in the spring of 1843, and 
except for a request that James Webb become a candidate for 
president in 1844, he took no part in politics. The documents 
included among his papers indicate that he was busy collecting 
material for his long-planned history of Texas, an occupation 
which engaged him from this time on, though he never put his 
material together. In 1844 he became convinced that separate 
statehood for Texas was impracticable and he advocated annex- 
ation. When annexation was accomplished some of his friends 
urged him to become a candidate for the United States Senate,^ 
but he declined, and Houston and Thomas J. Eusk were elected. 

When the Mexican War began Lamar attached himself to the 
Texas Mounted Volunteers, and participated in the battle of Mon- 

^Hunt to Lamar. Juno o. 1839, Lamar Papers. Xo. 1322. 
'Lamar Papers. Xo. 214G. 
^Lama/r Papers. Xo. 2192. 



196 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 

terey. The Texas troops were under the command of Governor 
J. Pinckney Henderson, and Lamar acted as division inspector, 
and also as adjutant. He was highly commended by General 
Henderson in his report to General Taylor on the battle. Gen- 
eral Henderson wrote: 

General Lamar, my division inspector, (acting also as adju- 
tant,) was mainly instrumental in causing my troops to be called 
into requisition. He had accompanied General Quitman in the 
occupancy of a point in the lower part of the city, where the battle 
commenced; and it was at his suggestion that a messenger was 
despatched for my command. He was found in active co-oper- 
ation with the Mississippi and Tennessee troops; but rejoined my 
regiment on its arrival, and acted, during the balance of the fight, 
with the Texans.'* 

Shortly after the battle of Monterey Lamar was placed in com- 
mand of an independent company and stationed at Laredo for 
the purpose of holding that post and restraining the Indians from 
attacking the Texans. He continued in this position until his 
command was mustered out at the command of General Taylor 
in September, 1847, though he frequently urged that he be al- 
lowed to accompany the main army in case of further fighting. 
Anticipating General Taylor's order, he requested and obtained 
of the Texan Government the authority either to re-enlist his 
company or raise a new company to be stationed at Laredo to 
continue the work already undertaken, and it was not until June, 
1848, after the definite treaty of peace had been signed, that he 
mustered out his command and retired permanently from mili- 
tary service.^ 

As soon as the Texan authorities had taken possession of the 
disputed territory between Nueces and Rio Grande, they pro- 
ceeded to organize it as a part of the State of Texas. Lamar him- 
self, as commandant at Laredo, on July 3, 1847, called an elec- 
tion for local officers at that place. The counties of San Patricio 
and Nueces were organized by the Texas Government, and took 
part in the election of state and county officers for the year 1847. 
Lamar became a candidate for the House of Representatives from 
those two counties, and on November 1 was elected without oppo- 

*House Executive Document No. 4, 29 Cong., 2 Sess., p. 98. 
"For this paragraph see Lamar Papers, Nos. 2297-2390. 



Clusing Years 197 

sition. He served in the session of 1847-1848, while his company 
was being re-enlisted and reorganized. He was proposed for 
speaker of the House, but was defeated by J. W. Henderson of 
Harris county by a vote of 34 to 34. He was chairman of the 
committee on State Affairs, but took little part in the activities 
of the House; and as soon as the session was over, he returned 
to his command in Laredo, where he staid until June, 1848. 

From this time until 1857 the records of his movements are 
scanty. In the summer of 1849 he went again to Georgia on 
business connected with the eleven-league grant of land to a 
Georgia company, the business which had taken him to Texas in 
1835 and 1836. He remained in Georgia until April, 1851, when 
he returned to Texas. There he married Miss Henrietta Moffitt 
of Galveston, after having remained unmarried since the death 
of his first wife in 1835. While in Georgia he contributed his 
opinion to the great questions of the time in public addresses and 
newspaper articles. 

On August 1, 1850, a group of Macon citizens wrote a letter 
requesting that Lamar address a public mass meeting to be held 
in Macon on Clay's Compromise. Declining their invitation, 
August 16, he wrote that he was opposed to the Clay Compromise, 
but also to the Missouri Compromise; he was for all the rights 
of the South, and opposed to all compromises save those of the 
Constitution. Clay's and the Missouri Compromise were only 
capitulations on the part of the South, for if Congress could pro- 
hibit slavery north of thirty-six thirty, it could prevent it south 
of that line. "Naturally connected with these matters," he con- 
tinued, 

is the present position of the affairs of Texas. It forms tlie most 
practical issue of the day. I look upon the Santa Fe country as 
forming the first battle-field between the assailants and defenders 
of the institutions of the South. The Free Soilers are deter- 
mined to seize the territory for the purpose of abolishing slavery 
upon it. It is now lawfully a part of Texas, and subject to the 
dominion of her institutions. If it can be severed, and united 
with New Mexico, Abolition will accomplish its ultimate purpose 
at once within the legitimate limits of a sovereigii state. 

The title of Texas to the territory in question is indisputable. 
It was within her designated limits while she was an independent 
government. She held to the Eio Bravo, by the same right by 



198 Miraheau Buonaparte Lamar 

which she held to the Sabine. When she was admitted into the 
Union, these boundaries were well defined, and recognized by Con- 
gress; and it was out of this ver}" Santa Fe country, that the new 
states were expected to be formed, which are alluded to in tlie 
resolutions of annexation. 

He went on to say that it was a violation of that territory by 
Mexico which had resulted in a declaration of war by the United 
States, and said that the only remedy for the South was secession. 
"This is the only course for the South," he said. 

There is no safety in the Union as it now exists. It is not the 
Union of the Constitution — not the Union established by the 
Sages of the Eevolution; not the one that 'ensures domestic peace 
and tranquility;' — but another great dynasty erected on its 
ruins — a Eussian Empire, which makes a Hungary of the South. 

He advised a convention of the Southern States, fully empow- 
ered by the State sovereignties, to meet as speedily as possible 
upon the adjournment of Congress, to organize a Southern Con- 
federacy in case the measures of the abolitionists were adopted. 
He doubted whether or not the Union could continue, but thought 
that if the South should withdraw, the North would come to 
terms; however, he thought the South was too divided to secede. 
Thus he placed himself among the extremists of the South, which 
was not strange when we recall his earlier alignment in the Indian 
and tariff controversies of the Jackson period.'^ 

He continued to collect historical material, which he began to 
organize, and even had one chapter of a work on Long's expe- 
dition printed. No record of public activity remains, however, 
until January, 1855, when he became president of the Southern 
Commercial Convention held in New Orleans at that time, retir- 
ing before the close of the session on account of ill health.^ In 
1857 began his diplomatic career, which I shall discuss in some 
detail. 

At the outset of the Buchanan administration Lamar became 
an applicant for a diplomatic post, which he considered as jus- 
tified on account of his record as a States' Eights Democrat, and 
because his nephew, Howell Cobb, was secretary of the treasury. 

"Lamar Papers, No. 2461; Columbus Times, Septemhcr 10, 1 S.IO. 
''Lamar Papers, No. 2489. 



Closing Year.^ 199 

It seems that from the beginning Lamar desired an appointment 
to Nicaragua.'* On March 6, 1857, Senator Kusk of Texas and 
J. A. Quitman of Mississippi sent a joint letter to Henry A. Wise, 
Governor of Virginia, asking for his influence to secure the ap- 
pointment of Lamar as "resident minister to some of the European 
or South American Eepublics," and stating that he would accept 
a position as governor of a territory. Lamar was recommended 
as having been devoted to democratic principles throughout a long 
life, stating that he was induced to make application for such an 
appointment on account of pecuniary distress." On March 8 
Lamar applied in person to President Buchanan, and shortly after 
it was determined to appoint him as minister to the Argentine 
Confederation. The formal announcement of the appointment 
came in a letter from Lewis Cass, secretary of state, on July 23, 
1857.^° Lamar was delayed in setting out on his mission on 
account of financial difficulties, and when he was about to start, 
Cass and Buchanan decided to send him to the Central American 
republics, Nicaragua and Costa Rica as minister plenipotentiary. 

In the absence of documentary evidence I am unable to state 
the cause for this change, but the cause seems reasonably clear. 
On November 16, 1857, Cass and Yrissari, the minister of several 
of the Central American States had signed a treaty which was 
expected to settle all questions between the United States and 
Nicaragua, and as Lamar had asked for the Nicaraguan post in 
the beginning, and had been given another one because Nicaragua 
was still unrecognized, the natural thing to do was to change his 
commission and send him to Nicaragua for the purpose of securing 
the ratification of the treaty. 

I shall not be able to discuss in this paper the details of the 
conditions in Nicaragua out of which this treaty developed, nor 
the connection of Lamar with the negotiations; but I shall briefly 
outline the conditions as they were in order to show the super- 
human task undertaken by Lamar. On August 27, 1849, a con- 
tract was entered into between the Nicaragua Government and the 
American Atlantic and Pacific Ship Company, by which in return 



'See McT-«od to Green. February 25, 1857, Lamar Papers, No. 2510. 
'Rusk and Quitman to Wise, March 6, 1857, Lamar Papers (dra) 
3. 2511. 
'"Cass to Lamar, July 2.3, 1857, Lamar Papers, No. 2522. 



200 Miraheau Buonaparte Lamar 

for a certain sum of money paid by the company, the company 
was granted exclusive right to operate the Lake and overland 
transit from the Atlantic to the Pacific. ^^ On August 14, 1851, 
the contract was amended, the company thereafter styling itself 
the Accessory Transit Company, though no vital changes were 
made in the charter. This charter was annulled on February 18, 
1856, by a decree of the revolutionary government, because, as it 
was claimed, the company had failed to carry out the terms of 
the agreement. ^- 

The Walker filibustering expedition, which began in 1855, had 
come to a close with the expulsion of Walker on May 1, 1857; 
but the expulsion of Walker did not mean that a stable govern- 
ment would be established any more than that there had been a 
stable government before he went to Nicaragua. The United 
States had refused to recognize the Walker government, and the 
government set up after Walker's expulsion was unable to secure 
recognition at once. But as the new government failed to restore 
the ships of the Accessory Transit Company, or to open the transit 
for any other company, the United States thought it time to take 
a hand in the matter. Hence Yrissari, who had been minister 
for several of the Central American republics for a number of 
years, and had recently been appointed minister for Nicaragua, 
was received officially on November 16, 1857, for the purpose of 
signing the treaty mentioned above. This treaty, which prob- 
ably had been discussed by Cass and Yrissari before this date, 
provided for the guarantee of the transit route by the United 
States for the benefit of all nations. The provision was that the 
United States be authorized to employ troops for the purpose of 
keeping the transit route open in case Nicaragua should fail. 
Besides this, there was the usual agreements as to commerce.^ ^ 
This was the treaty that Lamar was expected to secure the ratifi- 
cation of by Nicaragua. 

Lamar arrived in Nicaragua and spent a little more than a year 
there in fruitless efforts to secure the ratification of the treaty. 
The contrary interests of three transit companies that claimed ex- 
clusive rights on the isthmus, the interests of Great Britain and 

^^Senafe Document No. 194, 47 Cong., 1 Sess., p. 49. 
^Ubid., 88. 
''Ibid., 117-12.5. 



Closing Years 201 

France, and the natural unwillingness of the General Americans 
to deal fairly or openly, prevented the accomplishment of his ob- 
jects. He arrived less than a year after Walker was driven from 
Nicaragua, and just a short time after his arrest on his second 
attempt to revolutionize that republic; hence, his reception was 
not cordial, and he was never able to secure the confidence of any 
of the officials. The President went so far as to accuse Lamar 
of being involved with the filibusters, and of having made threats 
that unless the treaty should be ratified a new filibuster expedi- 
tion under the auspices of the United States (rovernment would 
take place; but he was afterwards forced to retract this charge.^* 
In July, 1859, having become hopeless of any result from his 
efforts Lamar applied for a recall, which was granted, and the 
latter part of that month he was back in Washington, having 
drawn up a treaty which he thought might have proved acceptable 
to the United States Government, but which was never approved. 
He remained in Washington only a short time, and then returned 
to his home in Richmond, Texas. He was there preparing to 
enjoy the association of his friends, when he died rather suddenly 
on December 19, 1859. 

"A complete history of Lamar's experiences in Nicaragua does not come 
within tJie purposes of this paper. For the sake of unity I have been 
compelled to orniit the story of his connection with that hotbed of revolu- 
tion and international rivalries, but I shall in the future publish the 
result of my investigations in this field of his activities.^'* 

"See for this paragraph Senate Documents, 35 Cong., 2 Sees., No. 1, 
p. 19. 



BIBLIOGRAPHY 

Manuscript Sources 

Army Papers, 1840-1841. Texas State Library. 
Austin Papers. University of Texas Archives. 
Lamar Papers. The use of this material was made easy by using 
the excellent calendar by Miss Elizabeth West. 

Printed Sources 

Adams, British Interests and Activities in Texas, in Southwestern 

Historical Quarterly. 
Gammel, H. P. N., Laivs of Texas. 
Garrison, G. P., Diplomatic Correspondence of the Republic of 

Texas. 
Gregg, Josiah, Commerce of the Prairies. 
Hansard, Parliamentary History of England, 3rd Series, XXXIV, 

XXXV. 
Jones, Anson, Memoranda and Official Correspondence Relating to 

the Republic of Texas. 
Journals of Congress. 
Kendall, Texan Santa Fe Expedition. 
Malloy, Treaties, Conventions, Etc., IL 
Moore, To the People of Texas, Congressional Globe, 33d Cong., 

1 Sess., Ap. 
Secret Journals of the Senate of the Republic of Texas. 

Secondary Works 

Bancroft, H. H., North Mexican States and Texas. 

Barker, E. C, "The United States and Mexico," 1835-1837, in the 

Mississippi Historical Review, I. 
Bolton, H. E., Athanase de Mezieres and the Louisiana-Texas 

Frontier. 
Brown, J. IT., History of Texas, 2 volumes. 
Bustamante, Cabinete IMcxicana, I. 
Christian, A. K., "Tariff History of the Republic of Texas," in 

Southwestern Historical Quarterly, XX. 
Crane, W. C, Life of Sam Houston. 

203 



204 Bihliograplnj 

Dublan and Lozano, Legislacion Mexicana, III. 
Foote, Henry S,, Texas and the Texans, 2 vols. 
Kennedy, Texas, 2 volumes, 1841. 

Marshall, T. M., A History of the Western Boundary of the Louis- 
iana Purchase. 
Mayes, Edward, Lucius Q. C. Lamar. 
Miller, E. T., A Financial History of Texas. 
Reeves, Jesse S., American Diplomacy under Tyler and Polk. 
Rives, United States and Mexico, 1821-1848, 2 vols. 
Tlirall, Pictorial History of Texas. 
Twitchell, Leading Facts of New Mexican History. 
Yoakum, History of Texas, 2 vols. 

Periodicals 
Austin City Gazette. 
Columbus Times. 
Houston Morning Stur. 
Matagorda Bulletin. 
Niles Register. 

Southwestern Historical Quarterly. 
Telegraph and Texas Register. 

The publications contain articles of value on almost every phase 
of Southwestern history. 



INDEX 

Alcantro, battle of, 145, 146. 

Almonte, J. N., 138, 140, 146, 151. 

Amory, Nathaniel, 172, 173. 

Anahuac, tariff troubles, 61. 

Anaya, General, 145, 158. 

Armijo, Governor of New Mexico, 106, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127. 

Augustin, Major, 68. 

Austin, Henry, 103. 

Austin, Stephen F., 7, 60, 82, 83, 179, 180. 

Secretary of State, 103, 109. 
Austin, Texas, 34, 35, 55, 58, 59, 65, 109, 128. 
Avery, William, 54. 

Bazoche, 133, 134. 

Bean, P. E., 83, 84. 

Bee, Barnard E., 135ff. 

Big Mush, 98. 

Bird, Captain John, 76. 

Birdsall, John, 167. 

Bolivor, 8. 

Bowl, 64-101. 

Bravo, Nicolas, 140. 

Britain, treaty with, 155. 

Brushy Creek, 114. 

Burleson, Colonel Edward, 44, 45, 75, 95, 97, 104. 

Burnet, David G., 13, 14, 19, 39, 61, 65, 85, 87, 91, 93, 98, 148, 157, 194. 

Bustamante, 133, 134, 136, 140. 

California, 104, 133, 139, 145. 

Cameron, John, 65, 68. 

Canales, Antonio, 135, 144, 145. 

Canalizo, 97. 

Centralists, 45, 50. 

College of DeKalb, 23. 

Collingsworth, James, 19. 

Columbus Enquirer, 5, 6. 

Cooke, Col. W. G., 39, 115, 118, 120, 122. 

Cordova Rebellion, 971T. 

Dryden, William G., and Santa F6 Expedition, 11 Iff. 
Dunlap, Richard, 135, 140, 141, 171, 176, 178, 179. 

Echeverria, Xavier de, 140. 
Education, 22, 24. 

Edwards, Benjamin, and the Chcrokees, 82, 83. 

205 



206 Index 

Federalists, 45, 49, 50, 144, 145, 150, 157, 158, 160. 161, 177. 

Fields, Richard, 79, 80, 82, 83, 84. 

Filisola, Vincent, 68, 69, 70, 86, 97. 

Flores, Manuel, 97, 98. 

Fontaine, Rev. Edward, 54, 55. 

France, treaty with, 29, 192. 

Franco-Texienne Bill, 112. 

Fredonia, 84, 86. 

Goliad Massacre, 12. 

Gorostiza, 137, 140, 149, 183. 

Government. 11, 25, 37, 38, 42, 46, 48, 57, 59. 

Central, 104. 

Constitutional, 30, 31, 102. 

Federal, 4, 5. 

Independent, 104. 

Mexican, 49. 

Provisional, 25, 26, 31, 50, 101. 

Supreme, 69. 
Grayson, Peter W., 18, 19, 52. 
Green, Thomas Jefferson, 11, 12, 13, 14, 42. 

Hamilton, James, 31, 136, 138, 142, 146, 152, 155, 185, 186, 188, 189. 191. 
Henderson, J. Pinckney, 180, 181, 182, 183, 197. 
Horton, A. C, 19, 54, 66, 92. 
Hotchkiss, Archibald, 93. 

Houston, Sam, 9, 10, 12, 13, 18, 22, 26, 31, 34, 35. 36, 39, 41, 42, 44, .56, 
64, 66, 67, 68, 70, 72, 75, 88, 90, 101, 102, 112, 124, 165, 185, 194, 196. 
President, 46, 50, 52, 131. 
Hunt, Memucan, 166, 196. 
Hunter, John Dunn, 83, 84, 85. 
Huston, Felix, 12, 13, 15, 42, 43, 77. 

Indians, 3, 5, 21, 24. 34. 35, 37, 41, 44, 45. 
Alabamas, 99. 
Atrocities, 60. 
Bedies, 95. 
Biloxies, 78. 
Bison, 56. 

Caddoes, 74, 78, 95, 170, 171. 
Cherokees, 4, 44, 60, 64, 67, 68, 78, 79, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 

89, 91, 92, 95, 96, 98, 100, 101, 170, 171. 
Choctaws, 70, 78, 171. 
Civilized, 60. 

Comanches, 45_. .56, 60, 61, 68, 7.5, 76, 77, 78. 82, 105. 
Coshattoes, 78, 86, 99. 
Creeks, 4. 
Delawares, 92, 9.5, 171. 



Index 207 

Indians — Continued. 

Kickapoos, 70, 78, 93, 95, 171. 

Kiowas, 68. 

Lipans, 75, 78, 128. 

Pottawatomies, 171. 

Prairie, 78, 108. 

Pueblo, 126. 

Shawnees, 60, 78, 92, 95, 99, 171. 

Wild, 60. 

Jack, W. H., 110. 

Jackson, Andrew, 140. 

Johnston, A. S., 43, 95, 98. 

Jones, Anson, 184. 

Jones, William JeflFerson, 56, 105, 106, 108. 

Karnes, Henry. 68, 107. 

Kaufman, David F., 38, 101. 

Kendall, George Wilkins, 118, 122, 125, 128. 

Kennedy, William, 190. 

Lamar, L. Q. C, 3. 

Lamar, Mirabeau B., birth and ancestry, 1. 

Early life, 3ff. 

Candidate for Congress, 5. 

San Jacinto Battle, 8. 

Secretary of War, 9. 

Commander of army, 11-13. 

Presidential campaign, 15-19. 

Closing years, 196. 

Death, 203. 

Mier Expedition, 145, 146. 

Miracle, Pedro Julian, 68, 69, 100. 

Mole, Count, 191, 192, 193. 

Monterey, Battle of, 79. 

Moore, E. W.. 47, 49. 50, 150, 158, 160. 161, 162, 163, 178. 179. 

Navy appropriations, 39, 42, 46, 49. 
New Mexico, 103, 104, 105, 145. 
Nueces, 136, 137. 

River, 108, 145. 
Nueva Leon, 145. 

Pakenham, 137, 138, 141, 142, 148, 150, 151, 1.56, 158, 183. 18.5. 
Palmerston, 137. 138, 141, 180, 181. 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187. 188. 190. 
Panic of 1837, 25. 
Party, States' Rights, 4, 15. 

Rebellion. Cordova, 73, 91, 97, 100. 

Fredonian, 84, 85. 



<, 



208 Index 

Republic of the Rio Grande, 145. 
Revolt of 183r), 87; 1837, 1848, 125. 
Revolutionists, 104. 

Texas, 8. 
Revolution, 167. 
Rusk, T. J., 9, 12. 13, 14, 17, 42, 44, 68, 71. 72. 74, 92, 196. 200. 

Saligny, Alphonse de, 31, 191. 193, 194. 

San Antonio Road, 51, 54, 55. 79, 87, 90. 105. 

San Augustine, 18, 36. 59. 

San Felipe, 7, 60, 62. 

San Jacinto, 1, 8, 9, 12. 13, 42, 64, 107, 130, 135, 158. 

Santa F6, 39, 55, 56, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106ff. 

Tabasco, 48, 49, 150, 158, 161, 182. 
Tamaulipas, 133, 145. 
Tampico, 133. 136, 140, 145, 187. 
Tariff, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 40, 41. 
Taylor, General, 197. 

Treat, James, 132, 138, 139, 141, 144, 146ff. 
Trespalacios, Don Jose Felix, 79, 80, 81, 82. 
Troup, George M., Governor of Georgia, 4, 5, 6. 

United States, 12, 13, 15, 21, 25, 28, 29, 30, 40, 42, 47. 
University, 21, 22. 
Uribe, Rafael, 127. 
Urrea, 133, 136, 140. 

Vera Cruz, 11, 48, 49, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 150, 156, 187. 
Vidaurri, Francisco, 145. 

Waterloo, 54, 55, 56. 

Webb, James, 155, 156, 159, 160, 196. 

Wharton, W. H., 102, 103. 179. 

Yrissari, 201. 

Yucatan, 48, 49, 50, 158, 160, 161, 163. 
Alliance of Texas with, 156. 

Zapata, Antonio, 145. 
Zavala, Lorenzo de, 9, 15. 



/'. 






